Untold Facts

Prior Issues for Sheikh Hasina for Mending Fences with Khaleda

The Awami League leader Sheikh Hasina in her heavily guarded first press Conference in Dhaka after having ‘landslide’ victory in the 29th December general election for the 9th Parliament of Bangladesh offered her wish to work with Begum Khaleda Zia, the BNP chairperson, who lost the election not as a person but for her 4 party unity. It was nice of victorious Hasina for showing some broadness for the vanquished. We do not know if Khaleda would immediately respond to the offer in a positive way. But everyone knows about many hurdles and stumbling blocks in regard to issues of critical nature both factual and psychological, and unless and until those main issues would be mutually and satisfactorily agreed upon, there is hardly any scope for any immediate thaw. And in such divergent issues that remained irreconcilable so long for decades not merely due to personality cults but in matters of the basic principles of the State and of the country that it is not Khaleda but Hasina has to show real and effective broadness for resolution as pre-condition for developing a politically working and closer relation between the two.
First, could Hasina accept Khaleda’s martyred President Ziaur Rahman (Zia) as the announcer of the independence of Bangladesh on the 26th/27th March 1971? The second issue is, could Hasina accept Zia’s rise to legitimate power in November 1975? Could Hasina agree fully not to disturb anything including the 5th Amendment of the Constitution of April 1979 that Zia spearheaded keeping in tune with the beliefs of the overwhelming majority people of the country?

Khaleda and her party BNP combined in 4 party alliance have no bargaining point on these three basic issues, but Hasina can establish easy rapport just accepting the truths of historical facts that the Awami League has so long refused to yield not for validity of facts but for a sort of false ego.

That Mujib, Hasina’s father and the undisputed leader in 1971, did not declare independence of Bangladesh as many had expected is no short of proofs. On the contrary, Zia did so as rebellious serving Major is full of proofs. That Zia had been saddled on to the State power on the 7th November 1975 need not any proof to any one here and elsewhere. It was Zia, as the elected President of the country who initiated amendment of the 1972 Constitution that brought into effect the 5th Amendment that changed the state principles from secularism to Islamic ones, albeit through the duly elected people’s parliament of Bangladesh. Short of anything of these basic issues, BNP would be nowhere, and so none would be Khaleda in future Bangladesh politics.

If Hasina wished sincerely and honestly to have a good working political relation, it is Hasina who must come forward with first of all to agree to these basic three issues. Otherwise, rhetoric would not be of any use to make any thaw in mutual relations.

Dr. M.T. Hussain

Landslides and Fiascos in the Past: What next of 2008 Landslide?

Yet another landslide victory was recorded on the 29th December 2008 as a part of Bangladesh history in national general elections. Bangladesh had similar ones in 1954, 1970 and 2001. In all these landslides, it should be pondered about with care that anti-incumbency factor played a crucial role. In 1954 the factor acted against the Muslim League government of East Pakistan, in 1970 against the dictator Ayub Khan, in 2001 against the misrule of 1996-2001 of the Awami League and this time in 2008 against the BNP and to some extent against the Caretaker Government.

The landslide in 2008 of the Awami League had been in a joint venture of 14 plus parties labeled as MOHAJOTE as they did in 1954 as a member of the united platform of a few parties then styled as JUKTO FRONT. But the 1970 election was fought and won in landslide alone by the Awami League championing for autonomy and promises made to the millions of poverty stricken people for low price of essentials. Interestingly, the same low price of essentials had been the first in priority this time in 2008 for the ever increasing poverty-stricken people more than half of the 150 million people of Bangladesh.

The 1954 Front fell apart in months for rivalry of the then self seeking leaders. The next of 1970 led to civil war, intervention by India, secession and independence of Bangladesh that did end in a fiasco of price spiral, man made famine and deaths of unfortunate thousands in hunger that ultimately led to the tragic fall of the leader in the welcome popular coup d’ etat of August 1975. Counter coups, coups followed and restoration Parliamentary form of government that was killed and shelved for one–party State in early 1975 but fortunately rescinded in late 1975 but remained not fully effective until 1991. In other words, the 1970 landslide had the worst not only for democratic polity but also for economic well being of the people.

The landslide of 2001 came about for the people and by the people to elevate economic lives of the common people. Unfortunately, the people felt betrayed that not only brought the Emergency of January 2007 but also the landslide of December 2008.

The landslide win of 2008, not in terms of popular votes cast being at 47% against 37% ( if the arithmetic is reliable) for the 4- party admitted not ‘expected’ even by the stalwarts like Mr. Muhith, etc. (BBC RADIO, 30 Dec. morning) that in reality came about for their party in the Jote. In the 2001 landslide the 4 party Jote had 47% and the Awami League 40%. It is just about a reversal. But how and why?

The how and why are still to surface in clear terms. We have to wait for some time more for the clues. But we need not have to wait for the impending fiascos that the past stories tell us as we can assess from the 23 item promises the AL has made to the millions of poverty stricken people.

Among the first set of priorities are reduction of the price of the essentials for common people. Other promises are to fight corruption, contain terrorism, trial of 1971 ‘war criminals’, restoration of the 1972 Constitution, expediting in finishing up some cases pending in the High Court/Supreme Court but closely relevant to the 5th Amendment and so posing constraint to revive the 1972 Constitution, etc.

To think about the price reduction of essential items like rice, pulses, edible oil, etc. may possibly be easier to do for the big neighbor might be of rescue to large extent having well known close link, if not of subservient one, of the AL and the neighbor. This would undoubtedly be a relief and for keeping up to their first promise.

So far as corruption is concerned, people would expect that the leader first of anybody must clear herself off. The grafts in Mig 21 and the Frigate purchases must first be cleared up. Other graft cases in the label of ‘Consultancy charge’ should also be addressed with right earnest. People would expect that the top leaders without exception must give their correct property statements before taking oath of office as M.P.s, ministers, etc. clearly stating sources of their private income and properties.

There is no disagreement that terrorism of whatever form must be contained. Again the people must ask if the terrorist like Akhtaruzzaman Babu, Shamim Usman, Joynal Hazari, Hasnat Abdullah, etc, to name only a few here among many other god fathers of all districts during 1996-2001 who are at large in other countries should be brought back to Bangladesh and put to trial if not to put behind the bar without fair trial.

One can not miss asking all concerned if the cadres Sheikh Hasina groomed to ‘kill ten in reprisal for one’, or else put on bangles like women should be, are there to act the way she wished them to do during 1996-2001. Matiur Rhman Rentu, the noted author of AMAR FANSHI CHAI or Let me get hanged (for all misdeeds done in association with her), fortunately for Hasina, who fled for fear of life is already dead not in his birth place in Bangladesh but in Paris some time back.

So far as the revival of the 1972 Constitution in letter and spirit is concerned would involve hosts of tricky and puzzling issues interlinked with one another. Two- third majority in the Parliament that the AL maintains has made the revival an easy task. But that would mean doing away with the 5th Amendment of the Constitution that in turn means declaring every legal action taken from the 15th August 1975 to 4th April 1979 by the then governments have to be rescinded or declared void and unlawful. That would then take Bangladesh back to BAKSAL syndrome. These could be mitigated by possibly some other new act/s. Even so, at least one stumbling block would be unsurpassable and that is the fate of 15th August 1975 coup and the fate of the operators of the coup. Some of them are in custody awaiting decision in final appeal at the Supreme Court, but many are at large and living in many other countries.

There is a serious opinion that those in custody already having had lower court’s verdict for hanging to death happened to be miscarriage of justice. One retired justice of the Supreme Court of Bangladesh in an open forum discussion argued that should those coup operators of 15th August 1975 be hanged to death, the then chief of army whose subordinate the coup operators had been should first be hanged to death ( See, Dhaka daily, Amardesh, etc. 16th August 2008).

One may recall here that the whole miscarriage of justice had not only been orchestrated during 1996-2001, the period Hasina remained saddled as the Prime Minister of Bangladesh, but also she, in her election campaign speech in September 2001 appealed to the voters in public and asked for their mandate in ballots for the ‘second time’ so that she could hang to death the ‘murderers’ of her father on her own being saddled as the Prime Minister of the country, because she could not finish up the case in the first term. She had, it is understandable, deep thirst for blood of her father who fell victim in the victorious coup d’etat on the 15th August 1975, and no case on the issue instituted with police as there was an indemnity by itself as the coup was a successful one and also by the Indemnity Act of September 1975 until she became the Prime Minister 21 years after in June 1996.

The promise to try the ‘war criminals of 1971’ is a talked about issue, no doubt, in a section of our people. But it would be easier said than done.

First, the war has to be defined and put to its limit in extent. According to international set standard, the nine months of 1971 disturbance period had been a period of ‘civil war’ and none of the full scale war between parties concerned. The first reason was the lack of legitimacy. The then East Pakistan leader Sk Mujib who could possibly declare UDI (Unilateral Declaration of Independence) did not do so. Proofs are many here and there ( See, Impact International, London, 25th Sept 1987, S. Wolpert’s Zulkfi Bhutto, P.175, Choudhury M Sardar’s Ultimate Crime, p.98, etc). Major Zia’s Declaration on the 26/27 March 1971 was nothing but a rebellion. Declaration by 74 elected assembly members out of over 300 on the 17th April 1971 at Mujibnagar had no legitimacy for they had not been elected to do the job but meant instead for framing up the third Constitution of the independent country of Pakistan under the LFO (Legal Framework Order). Having had no legitimacy, the actual war took place from 3rd December to 16th December 1971 that concluded through the instrument of surrender made between Pakistan commander Niazi and Indian commander Arora; none other signatory was there in the document. That certainly made the war between India and Pakistan. The question of war crime could lawfully only come for anything so committed during these 14 days. The 195 listed by the subsequent government meant only for army men and nothing to do for any civilian. If any question of civilian now is taken for trial under war crime, both sides of the 1971 divide must be taken to book and not only one side or the ‘vanquished’ for witch hunting. Further, after letting those 195 go untried, there is no moral ground to put any escape goat to trial as ‘war criminal’. Whether any legal basis could be found to act in the matter for anyone that may have any reasonable basis remains an open question.

For likely trial in International Court under the UN, the case may find little valid ground. The trial of Ramush Haradijina, one time Prime Minister of Kosovo, continued in that court for three years since early 2005 but the verdict ended in nothing, Ramush was freed on the 4th April 08 (Al- Zazeera TV 03 A.M. Dhaka Time News) as an innocent person having had no proof to prove his guilt. He returned home after facing his trial in The Hague International Court of Justice for three years as a hero among his people the next day on the 5th April, 2008.

There are some powerful friends of Bangladesh in the outside world. They may not interfere into the internal affairs of the country. But there are issues, particularly in relation to 1971 and in any way connected to Islamic belief as the 1971 ‘crime’ for example by some powerful Muslim countries who matter and did not see eye to eye or even some other Islamic groups that if picked up again afresh in 2009 may have serious repercussions in those quarters that Bangladesh with its vulnerable economy could hardly ignore or give a damn.
The ego of landslide of 2008 could well be there and there is already in the news that the Dhaka University halls of student residence have already been taken over by the cadres of the victorious party in the label of students. Such unfortunate syndrome is reminiscent of the past history not only of politicization of everything including appointment of V.C.s from party cadres and Presidium members but also of fascism that must be changed to fair democratic norms. Otherwise, the fiasco that followed this time fourth in succession may not be different next time in fifth.

Dr. M.T. Hussain

The 2008 Elections in Bangladesh—Was it Engineered?

The just concluded election on December 29, 2008 saw the landslide victory of the Awami League led Moha Jote in Bangladesh. It bagged 264 out of the 298 constituencies declared. The BNP led 4-Party was virtually crushed, winning 31 seats only. The victory of the Moha Jote was not so much of a surprise as the margin itself. None, not even the victorious Awami League, in its wildest dream thought of such a result.

Overall, Awami League secured 48 percent popular votes while BNP managed a little over 32%. Ershad’s Jatiya Party was a big beneficiary of his alliance with the Moha Jote, securing 27 seats with 7% votes. Jamaat-e-Islam was reduced to 2 seats with 4 % votes.

The Question is: Why and How Did it Happen?

BNP’s allegation of rigging in all the 299 seats contested may not hold good. International observers gave it a clean bill of health. I think for the first time, the Bangladeshis voted mostly freely. And the voter turnout was variously put at 80 to 90 percent, a record for Bangladesh.

Was the election engineered, as alleged by the BNP? It is a subtle question left to be examined and judged. In fact, election engineering is a common practice in all elections all over the world. Interested parties would stoop to any depth to defame the adversaries, at the same time going to any length to make their own cases.

The Chief Election Commissioner, in his first reaction after the election, said that under the circumstances people voted for the symbol, not the person, even though his office (CEC) vigorously campaigned for quality representatives. He compared the recently concluded elections with the 1954 elections in which the Jukta Front won a landslide victory over Muslim League in then East Pakistan. I understand the CEC earlier promised he would present a 1970 type elections in which the people voted for the Boat of Awami League.

Interested Parties:

We know the military, particularly the army chief General Moin U Ahmed, played the singular role in the execution of 1/11 and installation of a Caretaker Government (CTG). During the two-year run of the CTG, the army chief did not make any secret of his love and loyalty to a mainstream party and its supreme leader, while expressing his disgust for the other which was the immediate past ruling party. Reportedly, General Moin was to be sacked by then caretaker government for his refusal to take action against the continuing widespread violence that killed scores of people prior to 1/11. His wrath was manifested in the treatment of the BNP leadership that wanted him out. As such, the army chief could not be safe in a future government under such (BNP) leadership.

CTG was virtually an extension of the military’s 1/11 scheme. Additionally, it would ensure a government that would legalize all its actions, right or wrong, legal or illegal. It played several games towards that objective. It tried the now infamous Minus Two formulae which failed, not only miserably but left a deep scar to its credibility. Through connivance of a restructured Dudak, the CTG arrested the top leaders of the mainstream parties, including two Begums. Dozens of serious cases were instituted against them. All these were orchestrated ostensibly to force the disgraced leadership to tow the CTG line. One Begum immediately agreed and was packed off to her second home abroad, perhaps for further strategic arrangements. She publicly announced that she would legalize all the actions of the CTG when she took power.

The other Begum was not so forthcoming. She even declined to be a voter under custody. So she, as well as her two sons, had to undergo further sufferings and indignities. During her election campaigns, she blamed the CTG and claimed that the past two years had taken the country back by 20 years, earning further displeasure of the power that be.

War Criminals

The 1971 War Crime issue became a central issue this time. It was December, the Victory month and all the media focus was on the War of Independence, including the activities of the Razakars, Al-Badars etc. The Sector Commanders’ Forum was created to expose the war criminals and it did a good job, thanks to media and government and outside sponsorships. The aim was to discredit the Jamaat, the Jote partner of BNP. During the 2001 elections, Jamaat got over 14 percent voters, this time it ended up with 4 percent only.

The CEC had a stake too. Being an agent of the CTG, and by extension the military, it acted the way the bosses dictated. Its dislike for the immediate past ruling party was a public fact. If succeeded considerably in breaking this party too.

Outside Forces:

Observers suspect a few foreign hands in this election game. Continuing interest of our big neighbor in our internal affairs is a know matter. Through its intelligence agency and its local strings, it has always been trying to make Bangladesh its vessel state. Lately, it seemed to have enlisted the support of the US and UK governments towards a strategy that would ensure the victory for its surrogates in Bangladesh. In this game, our neighbor played the cards of ‘fundamentalism’ and ‘terrorism’ that appealed the superpowers. It is also not unknown to the Bangladeshis which party and which public personalities are working for our neighbor and for the foreign hands. The 2006 London Meeting involving Ershad, the US Dialogue involving Hussain Zillur (of CTG) are all part of this strategy. So, these foreign forces acted, overtly and covertly, for their designated party in Bangladesh.

It seems almost everything went against the BNP this time. The 1/11 was seen as a coup against the immediate past ruling party and Awami League chief Hasina was quick to claim the credit for the 1/11. Thus BNP’s misdeeds, corruptions, highhandedness and all lapses were in focus over the past two years, culminating the election campaign by its adversaries.

This is perhaps the ‘Election Engineering’, as alleged by the losing party.

R Chowdhury

San Jose, California, USA

53/52 percent is to bloom to overwhelming majority very soon

It is known that forty seven or forty eight percent of votes polled in favor of the winning party in Bangladesh on the 29th December election for the Boat symbol of the Awami that included not only the Awami League candidates but also some other parties combined in the 14 party’s alliance. Believing the figure to be near about the truth it can safely be presumed that though they secured over 260 seats in the 300 member 9th parliament have had consent of less than 50% majority people. The rest 53 or 52 percent did not see eye to eye with the programs and manifesto of the14 party’s alliance. However, the 7% of the 53/52% lend support to the Ershad’s Jatiya Party (JP) that could be taken not fully with the alliance, or even as distanced from the alliance in case Ershad is not given the position of the President of the country as had been the pre-condition of his support for the alliance that is now almost certain that Awami League’s own oldest person Zillur Rahman is almost certain to be the President of Bangladesh. In such certain case they have to remain happy with the 47/48 percent support for the Awami League, and so less than 50% people’s support. This is a weakness of the parliamentary democratic election we inherited from the colonial master, and unless and until the system would not be changed, say, likely for proportional representation, Bangladesh would have to bear the weakness and vulnerability of the Parliamentary democracy.

I use the term vulnerability to remind many of us that in the immature culture of political democracy and ignorance of many people about sovereign rights of the people and their duties to perform in exercise of their citizenship rights, some crooks have been telling many of our less prudent people to believe that because the nationalists got only a few seats in the election compared to the 14 party’s alliance, they have been totally vanquished and also their ideological stance for nationalist and Islamic values eliminated from the soil of Bangladesh. Is that really so?

Bangladesh has a clear history of landslide victories in elections during the past six decades. One may recall such facts of landslides since the one in 1946 followed by in 1954, then 1970, 2001 and this time in 2008. It was not only the landslides fifth in record in 62 years but what also happened in victory each time due to fall out of the anti- incumbency factor. The 1946 factor was the colonial British and their native lackeys whom the common people wished to eliminate, in 1954 the anti-incumbency factor was the Muslim League, in 1970 the Dictator Ayub Khan, in 2001 the Awami League and this time in 2008 the BNP and to some extent the Caretaker Government of Bangladesh. Unusually raised hopes in all those cases of victories followed despair each time.

In addition, the winners took all each time giving damn to the defeated group. This time things look little different though but not only facing resistance from the day one but also that the majority (53/52%) people was out of the lot. In other words, majority people in the country did not agree with the issues they put up as pre-election promises. That was quite likely .because, they had put up many issues that either had been settled long ago or of no factual anything but only propaganda rhetoric for advantage of the main enemy to exploit and obviously the big neighbor of Bangladesh.

Let us take the example of the ‘war criminal’ issue of 1971. Apart from the fact that the listed 195 war criminal, all serving army men, had been set free having had boasted ‘we know how to forgive’ and so done without any legal prosecution following the 1971 war, how could there be anybody left for prosecution not listed then and then, and not prosecuted during the last 38 years? The witch hunting under the so-called collaborators Act of 1972 had to be shelved after adopting the Constitution of the country in December 1972, because, the basic rights of citizens guaranteed in the Constitution automatically made the black law inoperative as that contradicted with he fundamental rights of citizens. The Special tribunal formed for trial of specific cases of arson, looting, rape, murder etc could not be morally pursued for both the sides of the 1971 political divide had been both victims and perpetrators. The legal prosecution as well became complicated as in most of the families there were divides, one for Bangladesh and the other for Pakistan even among the Bengali speaking population.

We know that the Awami League has proposed in their manifesto to try the ‘war criminals’. That is their commitment. Now they have to look for their mode to do it. As is known war criminals are tried in the International Court of Justice at The Hague. I know a few such cases. One such case was tried for three years from early 2005 to April 2008 against Ramush Haradijina, former Prime Minister of Kosovo. In the final court verdict he was found not guilty as there was no sufficient evidence and so he was freed on the 4th April 2008, and then returned as hero on the 5th April to his own country. One must wonder if any Bangladesh’s attempt to try any would end in a fiasco not without cost to the State not only in terms of money and effort but also of in terms of prestige and image, particularly, in the Muslim countries who are very likely to share sympathy with any such victim, because, such victim would in all likely be Muslim for the realities of situation in 1971.

Further, the party has promised to fully secularize Bangladesh politics by reviving the 1972 Constitution and ‘banning religion-based politics’. Could this be any simple task?
The first hurdle is in annulment of the 5th Amendment of the Constitution. Should they attempt to do this by the brute force of majority, it would certainly create emotional outburst with Islamic religious fervor among the people not only among the 53% but may rise to 90% because, Islamic religious sentiment is extremely strong in Bangladesh. Further more, many Muslim countries would take exception to it that may create enormous difficulties of multi-facet nature. What I intend to drive at is that the nationalist and Islamic values remained pre-dominant ethos of the people. The common people have not abandoned this issue by voting the alliance. The common and overwhelmingly poor people who constitute over 50% of the 150 million people voted in the hope that they would get cheaper goods for bare sustenance. Should they fail to deliver this bare minimum expectation, the swing is soon to surface and be repeated as the extreme of pendulum. In other words, it can safely be concluded that the nationalists and the Islamic forces are certainly poised for next and sixth landslide to swing in their favor. The 47% would then reduce to anything for the rest 53% to swell to victor for the nationalist and the Islamic forces. This is what the remote history would also tell for this land has been a land of the forces of values that made its start in the beginning of the thirteenth century with the start of the warrior Ikhtiaruddin Muhammad Bin Bakhtiar Khiljee in 1203 A.D.
I would rather say, cheers for the nationalist and forces adhered to Islamic values for equality of human beings, justice and fair play to put right now all sincere and honest efforts directed to realize the dream our forefathers had for centuries in this land of Bangladesh.

Dr. M.T. Hussain