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

Archive «
Launch Supplement «
Special Supplements «

The Americans have a fresh new scandal to deal with. The publication of photographs of former Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein in semi-naked conditions in a British tabloid and an American newspaper has only increased the pressure on the Bush administration to prove definitively that its policies are not geared to a general humiliation of Muslims around the world. Of course that kind of humiliation is not US government policy and cannot be under any terms of logic or politics. But what these new pictures will now do is hugely dent an already frayed reputation Washington has earned in Iraq. Coming nearly a year after the horrifying images from Abu Ghraib prison and only a week after a Newsweek report (subsequently retracted) of a desecration of the Quran in the US military camp on Guantanamo, the Saddam images will only solidify Arab and by extension Muslim anger against American policies in Iraq and perhaps even across the globe. The clear intention of those who released the pictures, namely, that the images will dampen the insurgency will, therefore, turn out to have been misplaced. If anything, President Bush and the neocons he provides leadership to can expect a swift new outcry against the administration’s record in the Middle East.
   The US president has been dismissive of the idea that the photos can only add fuel to the insurgency. He has clearly missed the point, which is that all Arabs are by and large a proud people. Add to the old traditions the idea that most Arabs are Muslims as a matter of faith and what you have here is a very potent mix of historical tradition and religious belief. It was this deadly combination that contributed to the very justified outrage at the pictures which came out of Abu Ghraib last year. In much the same manner, one can expect a new flare-up over the Saddam pictures. The move by the United States military towards locating the elements responsible for the release of the pictures is surely welcome. The Americans will surely have known by now that unless they move quickly to nab the culprits responsible for passing on the pictures to the Sun in London, the consequences can be quite frightening. As it is, the Americans are not having a whale of a time in Iraq. Indeed, the unending nature of the insurgency makes it increasingly clear that something of a new Vietnam is coming to dominate the councils of American policy making and no one appears to have a clue as to what to do about it. From all the signs available, it is becoming pretty obvious that President Bush’s second term in office will be dominated by Iraq in the way Vietnam cast a thick cloud over the presidency of Lyndon Johnson in the 1960s. The difficulty for Mr. Bush, though, is that having gone into Iraq he still does not realise the grave conditions he has plunged into. That is truly a matter of regret.
   The release of the Saddam pictures are an additional burden for the US administration, for it not only is a violation of the privacy of an individual but brings into question the American attitude to the Geneva Conventions. One does not expect such appalling behaviour from a country which has always, rightly or otherwise, taken pride in its adherence to civility, decency and everything that upholds the law.

Hartals and erosion of support

The Awami League should have heeded the appeals of guardians and students regarding yesterday’s hartal. The fact that its leaders did not consider such examinations as HSC, degree, O and A levels important enough to warrant a change in their political programme is deeply regrettable. The practice in all countries where democracy is pursued or is sought to be upheld is that politicians take into consideration every concern of citizens before they make any move toward protest. No party believing in coming by political power through public support at the ballot box is consciously willing to lose votes through moves that somehow look rather insensitive to public opinion. It is in that light that the Awami League should have considered conditions before going for Saturday’s hartal.
   We have always argued that the hartal as a political weapon has lost its effectiveness through much use and abuse in the last many years. While we do not argue over the question of politicians and parties possessing the right to observe hartals (which means we do not think that there ought to be any law banning hartals), we do happen to think that when there is a frequency of hartals in the country, it is a sign of declining intellect among our political quarters. In a democratic set-up, there is a whole wide range of options to choose from as a way of registering political protest. Unfortunately, in the fifteen years since the return of parliamentary government in the country, the two major political parties have generally demonstrated an atrocious absence of ability where a registering of meaningful protest is concerned. They have consistently believed that calling for a shut-down of the country is enough to bring about change. In reality, such calls have, with exceptions, added to public misery and anger. Back in the late 1990s, something of a fresh breeze looked about to come into national politics when the ruling Awami League promised not to call a hartal even if it went into opposition. The BNP remained conspicuously silent instead of reciprocating the move. And when after the general elections of 2001 the Awami League, by then in opposition, went back on its promise, it sought to justify it through noting the BNP’s unwillingness to support an end-to-hartal politics. It all amounted to a situation where the idea was one of a party’s doing a bad thing because its rival was doing it too. And that is how the country has found itself stymied by such constricting political behaviour.
   For the Awami League, as for other political parties, the need is to remember the people. The young whose exams have been disrupted by the recent hartals and their parents will find it hard to support the AL in future. Will the party leadership shoulder the responsibility for such erosion of support?

It has been the most talked about election in memory. Judged by the preparation and the campaign it appeared to be the most hotly contested one, too. By any criteria, the recently concluded election for the post of mayor of Chittagong City Corporation is a milestone in the democratic politics in Bangladesh.
   The two main candidates contesting in the election belonged to two major political parties. But the incumbent candidate was not nominated by his party but by an alliance of opposition parties under the banner ‘Nagorik Committee’. This may presage a broader based and more comprehensive platform for the future. Arrayed against him was a sitting State Minister who had served as non-elected mayor of the port city earlier. Inevitably, the election became a test of power between the four party alliance-Govt. and the opposition. The stakes being high, both sides launched a blitzkrieg of electioneering. Party stalwarts of opposition parties not only made frequent visits to Chittagong but also set up their temporary camps there to help their candidate. From the side of the four party alliance-Govt. there was equally vigorous efforts to mobilise all resources to support their candidate’s campaign.
   As the campaign reached fever pitch there were allegations and counter allegations. The first was that both the candidates were spending money far exceeding the permissible limit. The Election commission had either no means of checking this and taking necessary action or did not pay much attention to this. Next came the allegation that the Commissioner of Chittagong metropolitan police was giving all support to the four-party alliance candidate. The Election Commission took this seriously and after summoning the police commissioner for a hearing, asked the Govt. to withdraw him. The govt. complied with this request and withdrew the errant police officer. It was a commendable decision on the part of the Govt. which did not fail to impress the public. No sooner had this episode been over, news came to the Election Commissions about the Commissioner, Chittagong Division holding meeting with officials regarding the ensuing election. As the Commissioner had no role in election matters the Election Commission reprimanded him and advised not to meddle further in the matter.
   Dramatic events were taking place in Dhaka, too, involving officials. According to news reports, representatives from ‘Howa Bhaban’ came to Election Commission and were closeted in close-door meetings with the Secretary of the Commission. The subject of discussion was not revealed but observers concluded that it concerned the Chittagong election. While the closed door meeting was taking place, the Chief Election Commissioner was holding his own meeting to discuss measures taken to conduct the mayoral election safely and satisfactorily. These events within the Election Commission once again brought into sharp focus the internal division plaguing the Commission. The Secretary to the Election Commission belongs to PM’s office and is not accountable to the Chief Election Commissioner. This gives him the authority and scope of taking action without any order or guidance from the Chief Election Commissioner. His neutrality thus became suspect under the circumstances. Referring to this unsatisfactory administrative arrangement, the CEC told newsmen with great frustration that his requests to the govt. to make postings and transfers of officers on the basis of proposals from the Commission had fallen on deaf ears. This created the impression that the govt. was not interested in changing the status quo because it suited its interests. This unsatisfactory administrative arrangement and other matters call for empowering the Election Commission with greater authority. The CEC told newsmen that he was finalising his recommendations for reform of the EC with a view to strengthening it. It is strange that the CEC should have taken so long to realise that the EC needed reform and was formulating proposals only before the expiry of his term. Judged by his record in office, he has not given good account of himself as an efficient, forthright and effective head of the Commission. He is talking bout reform now when this has already become a priority demand from the opposition parties. If some one accuses him of opportunism one cannot be blamed.
   Back in Chittagong, cabinet ministers were openly campaigning using govt. vehicles with flags flying. They also made extravagant promises to vote on behalf of the govt. trying to entice voters to support their candidate. Leaders of the Nagorik Committee, led by Dr. Kamal Hossain, met he CEC in Dhaka and apprised him about the activities of the ministers. It is not known if the meeting led to any action by EC. The ministers stayed in Chittagong till the election was over, according to newspaper reports.
   More sensational news came about the appointment of peons, ayas, leaders of CBA and even mentally retarded persons as polling officers. The Additional Commissioner, as Returning officer, reportedly made these appointments, which made head-line news in national dailies. That this could not have been done without instruction from higher authorities became clear to many. When his attention was drawn to this unprecedented action, the CEC became upset and asked the Returning Officer to change the appointments. Whether all the polling officers were freshly and properly re-appointed or not, could not be known. That such irregularities call for disciplinary action against the concerned official goes without question. These arbitrary and motivated actions made a mockery of conducting election strictly according to rules.
   The suspicion about the biased role of the Returning Officer became stronger when after ten o’clock at night the announcement of election results were stopped all on a sudden. Restive and angry crowds surrounded the circuit House where the Returning officer had set up his office. The public kept their vigil until the results were announced. This sudden stoppage gave rise to resentment and suspicion that attempts were being made to stage a media coup i.e. by announcing fake results under cover of darkness when everyone would be asleep. Many thought that it was the presence of hundreds of thousands of people supporting the incumbent candidate that prevented a fraud on vote counting. Whether this speculation is correct or not, the various incidents involving govt. officials lend credence to this.
   Apart from the irregularities and lapses mentioned above there was a bright side to the election. In spite of the bitterness and tension created by the campaign no untoward incident took place. The maintenance of law and order was exemplary. For this the army, BDR and police deserve congratulation. The workers of both sides, caught in the electioneering frenzy, acquitted themselves creditably. The mayoral election in Chittagong should be considered as an object lesson for all parties concerned regarding what to do and not to do.
   Though the election was hotly contested the results did not go down the wire. It did not turn out to be a close call at all. The incumbent won by a huge margin of over ninety thousand votes. The main Opposition party has gone into a triumphal mode, declaring that the result indicate the shape of things to come in future. This is an exaggeration of facts and an over optimistic interpretation of the result. The incumbent mayor may belong to the major opposition party but he did not contest election using party platform. The alliance under the label Nagorik Committee is also a fledgling body without previous engagement in similar contest. To attribute the victory to the combined efforts of the Nagorik Committee also would be unrealistic. The incumbent candidate won the election mainly for two reasons. Firstly, it was his personal popularity based on his record as mayor that clinched the majority votes. Inter-necine squabbling among the BNP leaders of Chittagong contributed to the advantage of the incumbent candidate in no small degree. These favourable factors may not be present for the opposition candidate in all the constituencies in the next general election. Therefore, neither the main opposition nor the alliance of opposition parties can afford to gloat over the result and be complacent. After all, one swallow does not make a summer.