Untold Facts

Fascist VC to Technocrat Minister and Adviser

Technocrat fascists
One University Professor lamented to me with utter disgust that the newly appointed V.C. of the University he is still in job, a few days ago in disagreement on a certain issue under discussion, threatened the dissenting voice of another Professor in the Bengali verbatim, DEKHE NEBO- you must have bashing from me! The V.C. thus behaved not only in un-academic fashion but also clearly showed a fascist psyche. A print media had a report that said that one technocrat adviser of the Prime Minister also lamented and wished that could they have had finished off killing all ‘anti liberation’ elements immediately after the independence of 1971 they could now run the country unhindered with all ease. Yet in another occasion the Law Minister, another technocrat, in his typical trade unionist egoistic style threatened in anguish on the 25th May (09) not only Begum Khaleda Zia right now to vacate her home purchased long ago with valid legal lease deed for 99 years, and still valid for another 60 years or so, and while the matter is in writ hearing in the High Court cared nothing for remark made that was clearly subjudice, but also at the same time clearly intimidating the two judges hearing the writ going on as of today (27 May 09) in the bench. I am sure that any intelligent reader would have the three examples of ingrained fascism in the psyche of these persons of position in the present government that they cannot but be taken as inherited from the uncouth leaders from the party concerned of the past as to the present.

Old die hard
Intimidation has been the style of political action programs of the Awami League since the very beginning. I recall not each and every bit of those, but right now recall one incident of my college days in Dhaka in mid 1950s when the National Awami Party meeting of the great Maolana Abdul Hamid Khan Bhashani going on at the then Mukul Cinema Hall located at Sadarghat of old Dhaka was torpedoed by the hoodlums of the Awami League genre led by the person whom his father lamented as a misfortune of fostering the fascist bad guy, GOONDA (Hoodlum), in his own verbatim. The foster father’s lamentation in the verbatim to his boss, the sessions judge, in pre 1971 independence days made at the Faridpur District Court, still alive, but I must not name him here for his safety from fascist attacks at this old age over eighty by the current brand of the same genre of hoodlums.

Fatherly Maolana ditched
It may be noted for young readers that the same fire brand political Maolana had the same person as his own beloved fostered son in politics. And despite differences in politics, particularly in regard to both Indian equation and identity of the then East Pakistan between the two, it was the Maolana who as the ‘prophet of violence’ spearheaded the leader’s rise, his making a hero and ultimately made him the hero of the independence of Bangladesh in 1971. Had the Maolana, distanced away from the leader in late 1960s, he would have possibly end up in prison condemned in the Agartala Conspiracy Case for treason for good, if not in gallows, no matter whatever efforts and mechanics the big neighbor’s intelligence and the government would put in.

The latest proof of dishonoring the Maolana by the present government of the same party was done on the 26th May night by removing the plaque bearing the name of the Maolana engraved years ago with stone chips art work at the entrance of the Bhashani Novo Theatre at the BIJOY SHARANI east end that was replaced with the name of their BABAE QAOM with new stone art work at dead of night. What a mean of the genre unique in human history of ignominy of nations! What a big shame! Will the new name engraved stay there until the KEAMAT?

Hero’s Fascist way
The hero, in the independent Bangladesh, kept the Maolana in house arrest. His periodicals banned one after another, HAQ KATHA banned first, and then the SATTYA KATA also had the same ill fate, the editor Irfanul Bari to prison. The leader turning to absolute dictator continued to rule Bangladesh by dictates by passing the Parliament and normal administrative process. He had his bullyboys and the hoodlum forces of various kinds, not excluding his eldest son Sheikh Kamal, nephew Sheikh Moni and the ruthless S.P. of the metropolitan city, Mahbub. They used to run torture cells and killing missions against any body they considered opponents to the leader and the party. On top of these private hoodlums, he had the Gestapo style force termed as the RAKHHI BAHINI planned by the R&AW and trained, motivated and managed by their own army man General Ovan. All these forces killed nearly 40,000 of the patriotic youths they considered opponents of their leader and the party. For the first three years the country still had nominally the multi party system in the Parliament; but then went on in fully fascist way through declaring all parties banned except his own party renamed as BAKSAL or Bangladesh Krisak Sramik Awami League. That followed banning of all newspapers except four under his direct control, two by the Government and the other two by his pliant nephew Moni just only to eulogize the leader.

Freedom restored on the 15th August
The suffocating condition so created in the country for the freedom loving people had the most welcome free air breath on the 15th August 1975. A small group of determined patriotic army toppled the notorious dictator and set once again way for pluralism and open democracy. The fascist had the end.

Fascists rise and fall
The fascists reappeared in 1996 and made a hell of everything including putting the 15th August heroes to orchestrated trial for ‘murder’. They did not end there. The orchestration labeled the heroes as ordinary ‘murderers’ and sentenced to gallows through clear miscarriage of justice. At one point the second generation leader openly instigated the cadres to go on killing at the rate of ‘one for ten’ in reprisal. People got disgusted of the fascists and so decisively rejected them in October 2001 election.

Follies and conspiracy
Follies after follies that went on that the masters from outside took best advantage of and through naked interference brought the US-INDO lackeys to power in January 2009. The fascist reappeared in a new vigor and the people have been having feeling the pinches and gagging of everything and basic freedom of the people.

Genre’s Fascist psyche
Fascist mind is the genre’s psyche. The technocrats have more so for they need not have to go to seek people’s vote.

Brief respite
It may be that the freedom loving people might not give them long time unless they behave right in democratic norms shunning the fascist modes in everything. Should not they come to senses for pluralism and democratic norms, the people would certainly take to the streets sooner than later to rightly remove them from the State power possibly forever.

Author: Dr. M.T. Hussain

BANGLADESH AND PAKISTAN, Flirting with Failure in South Asia

BANGLADESH AND PAKISTAN, Flirting with Failure in South Asia By William B. Milam
Candid viewpoints
Comments by Shamsher M. Chowdhury, Bir Bikram

Ambassador William B. Milam, or Bill Milam as he is popularly called, takes us on a journey in his book through the political evolution in Bangladesh and Pakistan in the period following their break up as one country and the emergence of Bangladesh as an independent state in 1971. Having served as the Ambassador of the United States to both these countries, it would be fair to assume that Ambassador Milam would have had a ringside view to follow developments closely enough to reach the conclusions that he has in his book.

In the words of the author, the book is interspersed with several motifs. Religion is one, and understandably so since it was religion that was the basis for partitioning India after the British Raj ended in 1947. As a corollary to that, culture has been cited as the second motif and history is the third. A recurring motif is the relations of both of these countries with their giant neighbor India. A common element is the role of the military in the political developments in both of the countries.

I will understandably confine my comments to the Bangladesh segments only.

In the case of Bangladesh, Milam believed that with the reintroduction of democratic political civilian led government in early nineteen nineties, the military had retreated to the barracks for good. He was less sure about that in the case of Pakistan. This was the main conclusion when the book was ready for print in early 2007. But events in Bangladesh in January 2007 forced him to change all that and the book needed rewording before it was finally published in 2009.

In the ‘Introduction’ chapter, Milam blames the “poisonous, zero-sum, political culture of the major political forces in Bangladesh that created the opportunity for a return of the military in January 2007, albeit, this time behind a civilian façade. In chapter 6 he details how this zero-sum game was played out in the fifteen plus years of civil political rule since 1991, resulting in a violent and confrontational political culture where the only real losers were the very voters who had entrusted these very politicians with their fate.

In writing for the Pakistani English daily “Daily Times” on January 24th, 2007, Ambassador Milam wondered whether the intervention in Bangladesh on 11th January 2007, would lead the country back from the brink or plunge it in the drink.

As we now see with hindsight, the solution, especially the introduction of a state of emergency and its gross misuse, only served to destroy the very political fabric of the country. Most commentators give the interim government at best a mixed scorecard. All agree it was powerless. The infamous, and abortive, “minus two’ formula and the highly politicized anti-corruption drive were its two most stark failures, not to mention the gross use of physical and mental torture on people under custody in violation of international conventions to which Bangladesh is signatory. They even made “Reform” sound like a dirty word, almost synonymous with collaborating with the enemy. In an attempt to “cleanse” the society of corrupt government and political officials, this government launched the much touted ‘Truth and Accountability Commission’ (Referred to in the book). As events subsequently prove, this was not just a cruel joke; it was a corrupt concept that ran counter to the very fundamental of the country’s Constitution that all citizens are equal in the eyes of the law. Worse, it was an exercise in deception.

In the epilogue, Ambassador Milam characterizes the publishing of a voter list with photos and the issuances of a National Identity Card (NID) as a remarkable achievement of the interim government. On Election Day in December 2008, there appeared, inexplicably, a second voter’s list, without photos whose authenticity is yet to be measured. As regards the NID, fake and counterfeit ones are now increasingly available in the market!
I thought it prudent here to briefly analyze the period of emergency to put things in perspective.

Milam talks at length, and presents his assessments, of personalities whose very names define the political landscape of Bangladesh even long after their violent departure from the scene—Sheikh Mujibur Rahman and Ziaur Rahman. Chapters 2 and 3 are dedicated to that, although Pakistan’s Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto is mentioned in details in chapter 2, but only in the context of Pakistan.

In the opening narration of chapter 2, Milam describes Sheikh Mujib and Bhutto as “flawed leaders” with limited intellect or ability to “…anticipate possible future events”……. and they failed to “build upon promising democratic beginnings”. He says that they both assumed leadership in a “burst of expectation and optimism but were unable to cash in on the strong mandate they had to nurture and establish viable democracies.” He calls both of them “historical failures because there own flaws were important contributing factors to the demise of democracy on their watch” in their respective countries.

Talking about the beginning of Bangladesh’ journey as an Independent State following its victory in 1971, Milam mentions the inherent positives the country possessed: a surfeit of good feeling and enthusiasm and a sense of euphoria that helped the early developments like writing a Constitution in a “remarkably short time frame”. Despite the negatives like abject poverty and illiteracy, not to mention the wanton damage caused by the occupying Pakistani Army during the period of the Liberation War, Bangladesh, in the words of Milam, “was relatively fertile soil for democracy” that bestowed on Bangladesh a more advantageous beginning than many newly independent, developing countries. But then he talks of the “surfeit of corruption, venality, self-aggrandizement……” that quickly engulfed the country, exacerbated by the new government’s mismanagement of the economic recovery and “overt favoritism towards its own partisans”. A rather prophetic comment is made by the author in the concluding paragraph on page 30 when he says “The civilian regime took office with overwhelming support, but its hold on the loyalties of most Bangladeshis was dissipated after three years to a point that undemocratic alternatives became attractive as early as 1975.”

Ambassador Milam characterizes Sheikh Mujib’s period of governance as one from ‘Euphoria to Neuralgia’. Mujib is described as the undisputed leader of a new Bangladesh, who was faced with the daunting task of rebuilding a country shattered by the civil war, with a dysfunctional economy and crippled transportation system, severe law and order problems and a population displaced far and wide. As mentioned earlier, the author credits, and rightly so, the government of the day with framing a liberal, democratic Constitution with an independent judiciary for the new country within a short time. But, as mentioned in the book, with increasing political and economic pressure, adherence to liberal constitutionalism and judicial independence broke down by the end of 1974.

In page 34, the author writes about Mujib sinking into “a bog of corruption and ineptitude”. He describes Mujib as a good example of charismatic leaders of independent movements who do not always possess the organizational skills or intellectual flexibility to lead successfully the country their charisma had brought about. The subsequent paragraphs goes into details how this charismatic leader seemed to be “woefully short” of the essential mental agility needed to mold the new country into a viable nation. Milam is particularly critical of the socialistic economic policy pursued by the Awami League government under Sheikh Mujibur Rahman. Large scale nationalization of both the manufacturing sector, specially the jute industry, and the service sector, banks and insurance was severely damaging.

The author calls the Parliamentary elections of March 1973 as the “beginning of the end” for Mujib. Till then Sheikh Mujib and his party still enjoyed relative popularity but the accumulating problems had reduced its appeal. Hence the Awami League leaders “couldn’t resist padding the result by blatantly and unnecessarily rigging the polls”. In the words of the author, this exacerbated what had already become ‘widespread and growing popular discontent with Mujib and the League’. Things indeed got worse by the reign of terror launched by the much despised Jatiya Rakhi Bahini.

In the following paragraphs Milam writes how this sense of discontentment continued to grow into widening dissulionment. With the introduction of the one party governance system (BAKSAL) by amending the Constitution to a Presidential one and thereby giving Sheikh Mujib more personal power, “as if lack of power were at the root of his problems, rather than bad policies combined with overt corruption and incompetence” (page 37)………“Bangladesh had been transformed from a democracy into a personal dictatorship by the man who led its independence movement” (page 38).

Milam completes his narrative on this charismatic leader by briefly describing the events of his violent and brutal death, and that of most of his family members, in the early morning of 15th August, 1975. He says “popular esteem for Mujib had fallen so low by then that few lamented this brutal act, but its legacy continues to haunt Bangladeshi politics.”

Chapter 3 of the book is exclusively about Ziaur Rahman and his governance from 1975 to his “untimely” death in 1981; he calls this period “A short lived but fecund era” and he calls Zia’s politics as one of “hope and transition”. The word fecund has been used here to mean ‘very productive, or creative intellectually’.

Talking of how Ziaur Rahman was thrust into the leadership in Bangladesh following the chaotic period caused by military attempts to govern following Sheikh Mujib’s assassination in 1975, Milam states one of Zia’s early acts after he became Chief Martial Law Administrator was to rescind Mujib’s one party system. As Zia slowly but surely consolidated his power and “enhanced his already widespread popularity”, he set about traveling all over the country mingling with the common people in a “new and unprecedented form of politicking” spreading “offer of hope for a better future”.

Like other military rulers in South Asia, and elsewhere, before and after him, Zia “developed political ambitions and much of Bangladesh supported those aspirations as the first ray of optimism in their hard-scrabble lives’. Milam describes Ziaur Rahman becoming President in April 1977 as “a reflection of his immense popularity with the public”.

Milam talks at some length on ‘Zia’s fledging democracy’ and says President Zia’s economic and social programmes ‘laid the basis of a far-reaching social revolution’ which continued to build momentum, and no government, no matter how autocratic, “could have halted this revolution….” The economy was progressing and social development was approaching “take off”.

In page 61, Bill Milam talks of Zia’s killing and says the “hope for democracy dies with him”. However, Milam is critical of Zia’s inability as President to strengthen institutions that underpin a democratic system and he set in motion some trends that undermine it like “acquiescence to corruption as a way to buy off potential enemies”…and he had not “set up a mechanism for the automatic and peaceful transfer of power”.

In the closing parts of his narratives on this ‘extraordinarily popular’ man, Ambassador Milam tries to fathom the ‘Enigma of Ziaur Rahman’. On the one hand he was a military leader, a national hero, (he was the first to announce the formation of provisional government of Bangladesh from a radio station in Chittagong in March, 1971, page 35), and yet one “who returned his country to civilian rule and to civilian dominated two party electoral democracy” and “whether that was by design or default shall never be known”. One thing seemed clear to the author that Zia was “a pragmatic nationalist” and that was his main —- maybe his only —– principle. He used democratic processes to wield political power but doubts he believed in them. He used corruption to ensure loyalty but was incorruptible himself. He also discarded some of the important principles for which he had fought a bloody war of separation from Pakistan, to which Zia’s response was a typical combination of pragmatism and political vision —– a desire “to unite and integrate the entire population of Bangladesh into a national identity” (page 67). The iconic Nelson Mandela once said—it’s not always about principles, its how you use your position to face the bigger national challenge (my quote, as paraphrased).

Milam describes Zia’s political legacy as a mixed one. Among his most positive bequests to the nation was the reintroduction of the multiparty political system that had “withered under Mujib …. And Zia restored stability to Bangladesh when it appeared to be on the path towards catastrophic and chaotic failure”. “More than stability, he seems to have brought hope back to a beleaguered population, as disillusioned as he was by the near anarchy that obtained in the final months of Mujib’s democratic experiment”. But his political legacy involved an authoritarian system of almost personal rule. While this might be justified because of “his success in bringing the country back from the brink”, it was liable to misuse by less scrupulous politicians. Milam describes Zia as also being honest and trustworthy. He adds “Zia laid the basis for durable and robust democracy that must develop if Bangladesh is to continue its progress as a leader in social development among both the Third World and the Muslim world”.
A telling tribute to Ziaur Rahman comes in page 69 of the book: “It’s hard to imagine what would have happened to Bangladesh had Ziaur Rahman been assassinated in 1975 instead of 1981. A failed state on the model of Afghanistan or Liberia might well have resulted. Zia saved Bangladesh from that fate”.

Chapter 6 lists the destructive and destabilizing nature of confrontational politics practiced by the two major political parties when they alternated in government and in opposition between 1991 and 2006. Governance worsened with each successive government and corruption and sycophancy gripped almost every organ of the state. They both failed to live up to the people’s expectations.

But Bangladesh had a democracy to talk about and it was in transition. Besides, the social and economic indices were much better than countries in similar positions. There was very tangible success in the area of Primary and Secondary education and gender parity was achieved at the secondary level. Employment opportunities for women had overtaken even some developed countries.

In the context of Bangladeshi political leaders, Bill Milam in his book has implied that power, or more power, does not always help one to succeed in governing: people give you that power anyway when they repose their trust and faith in you. It’s how you reward that trust with conviction and through your efforts to reach out to them, to touch them and respond to their ethos that makes the difference between success and failure.

Politicians and political leaders, present and of the future, of all hue and political observers would be well advised to read, and more importantly study, Ambassador Bill Milam’s book. It’s instructive and yet not prescriptive. Importantly, it is candid.

The author of this piece is a decorated freedom fighter and former Foreign Secretary and Ambassador/High Commissioner of Bangladesh to Sri Lanka, Germany, Vietnam and the United States.

Minister’s Anger Against the Fifth Amendment, not Against the Fourth

Law Minister’s Anger
Sheikh Hasina’s Law Minister Shafiq Ahmad in a function of the BBC Bangla Radio I tuned in on the 24th May evening in got stunned to hear from the mouth of the minister that he had deep anger against the Fifth Amendment of the Bangladesh Constitution. His anger fell on the issue that the basic foundation of the Constitution had been ripped apart (SINNO VINNO KORE FELA HOESE- his Bengali verbatim). I had right then the feeling, if I could ask him, he should have had reminded himself that the basic foundations of the Constitution of 1972 had first of all and over four years ahead of the Fifth Amendment been ripped into pieces by the Fourth Amendment adopted on the 25th January 1975.

Pluralism of 1972 Constitution Shattered
Despite many grumbling on the modus operandi of framing the 1972 Constitution, as many skeptics took it that the document had been dictated from behind by external source, the Bangladeshi actors being the show boys, and further that the Constitution took shape in continuation of the State of Pakistan as the Members of the Parliament who framed the document had been elected earlier in the 1970 December election under the LFO (Legal Framework Order of the President of Pakistan), it had a very good element in the basic principle that Bangladesh would remain attached in perpetuity to pluralism and multi-party parliamentary democracy. Unfortunately, this pluralism was badly attacked by the rulers in independent Bangladesh at each and every point. The misuse of the process by the self- seeking rulers made a mess of everything and so mistakenly went to kill the system and replaced with one party draconian dictatorship styled as the BAKSAL Bangladesh Krishak Sramik Awami League). That is what evil the Fourth Amendment did.

BAKSAL’s Dictatorship
One may further wonder in the fact that the absolute leader who went in a still draconian way to pass the Fourth Amendment did the change from pluralism to one party rule not in due parliamentary process by a sort of dictate in the floor of the House permitting none but the only leader to speak and he made the announcement for the BAKSAL in only 13 minutes wonder session of the House! The leader further declared himself the top boss of the BAKSAL and that of the State, the lifetime President of Bangladesh with no scope kept open in case of the obvious need for change for peaceful transfer of power to the next person.

Gagging and Oppression
The unfortunate others for the freedom loving people of the country followed in evils like gagging of the press that enjoyed freedom since the long past, oppression of the dissenting views in politics by the special but unconstitutional Para Military force labeled as the Rakhhi Bahini. Quite amazingly this Rakhhi Bahini had been planned, organized, trained, motivated and armed by the Indian intelligence Agency, the R&AW directly under the Indian General Ovan. The Fourth Amendment reinforced these anti-national issues and so put bars on the freedom of the people of the country that they fought for in the past and in 1971.

Parliament made the Fifth Amendment
The Fifth Amendment enacted in early April 1979 not only was done by the duly elected Parliament in due process but also restored pluralism and multi-party democracy in Bangladesh that the 1972 Constitution had incorporated.

Other Marginal Changes
The two other marginal changes of the 1972 Constitution made in the Fifth Amendment were in regard to one, Bengali nationalism to Bangladeshi nationalism was nothing in any basic assumption as not Bengali speakers alone, let alone the ethnic Bengalese, constituted the citizens of Bangladesh. In respect of the principle of ‘Socialism’ of the 1972 Constitution, things so changed and developed all around the world and changed economic outlooks, incorporation of ‘Social Justice’ for ‘Socialism’ rightly fitted the demand of time. ‘Secularism’ adopted in the 1972 Constitution had little relevance with the aspirations of the devoutly religious people of the country. Should any serious government wish in this question to take any nod or not of the people they may well go for a referendum even in this period of the Awami administration that apparently professes to be ‘secular’ in politics.

None is 100% Secular
No society is 100% secular, because, the people have belief in some form of religion and spiritualism that underpins the psyche of nation and country concerned that affects politics, as well. The latest survey in the USA found that 95% of the American people are religious believing in the supreme lone God (Barack Obama, , Audacity of Hope, 2006, p.198). Whosoever would present India as a model he/she must note that the Indian Constitution does not have any written or set article therein about secularism but a casual mention in the preamble that did not provide for anything obligatory to follow in actions by the government. Indian former President APJ A. Kalam has candidly advised his people and the younger generation, in particular, on the issue ‘that the foundation of secularism in India has to be derived from spirituality’ (APJ A. Kalam, Ignited Minds, 2002, P.114). Britain, the provider of Parliamentary democracy to Bangladesh is not a secular country but a religious one, the Crown or the Queen/King being the head of both temporal and spiritual matters through the Anglican Church. There is no bar there to form religious based political party. In many European countries, there are religious based political parties. However, such parties are not allowed in Communist countries. Bangladesh is not a Communist country; there is very little or no possibility that Bangladesh would turn into an irreligious communist country even if Communists would take political powers. That was what rightly the Fifth Amendment did by replacing the trend of irreligiousness and gave a firm base for religiosity by both amendments, the Fifth putting ‘absolute trust and faith in the Almighty Allah’ and followed logically by the 8th adopting Islam as the State Religion, few years latter. Both steps were highly appreciated in general by the millions of religious people of the country.

BAKSAL and Bismillah
The Law Minister, however, elsewhere made a casual remark that even if the 5th Amendment would be scrapped neither Bismillah would be abandoned from the top of the Constitution nor the BAKSAL be re-introduced. Was not that funny? How could the secular constitution accept Bismillah at the top being that a nonreligious document? Why would not the other religious people object to that and would not press for their religious icons inserted along with?

Legal Complications
Scrapping of the 5th Amendment should automatically back the constitutional position of the country to BAKSAL syndrome. Well, reverting back from BAKSAL to the multi-party system would certainly need amendment to be passed in the Parliament. But whether the existing Awami League Jote Members could pass any such amendment would be another question of new legal complicacy. In other words, the romantics like the Law Minister would put the country from one legal complication to another, if not from the fry pan to the fire.

Romantics
It may thus be concluded that the few romantics and the daydreamers would only cram for scrapping off the Fifth Amendment of the Bangladesh Constitution.

Author: Dr.M.T. Hussain

Extra –Judicial Killings Now and in the Past

Angels
The Foreign Minister of Bangladesh Ms Dipu Moni in an interview with a foreign media stated very clearly therein on the 23rd May morning as tuned in Dhaka that there had been all extra-judicial killings that continued unchecked during the last seven years that they can not stop right away. She made the excuse as extra-judicial killings have been going on just as it had been before. Her party, however, promised to the people as a pre-election promise having had no such pre-condition of anything whatsoever she has now so made the excuse for.

Definition
What is extra-judicial killing? Such killing may rightly be so labeled as of taking any sacred human life without recourse to the due process of law. Any such killing is not only considered condemnably inhuman but also illegal in civilized countries. But the crucial point is that Bangladesh since its independence in 1971 is not immune from this guilt, and there is no truth in the claim that such extra-judicial killings had been there during the last seven years from late 2001 to December 2008.

Soon after 1972
I would argue that extra-judicial killings of not hundreds but thousands have been the way of life in Bangladesh since the very inception in early 1972, if one would condone the massacres of 1971 on one side or the other. The top boss then is on record of unleashing terror by his sayings like LAL GHORA DABRIYE DEBO (I will crush everything with red horse), NAKSHAL DEKHLEYE GULI KORO (Shoot at sight of Nakshal), KOTHAE AJ SERAJ SIKDER ( Where is Seraj Sikder today, he was killed), etc.

Blessed killers
The top boss prompted hoodlums and killers during the period from early 1972 to mid August 1975, then were prominent groups led by Sheikh Kamal, Sheikh Moni and SP (Dhaka) Mahbub. They controlled mainly the capital city and around through their own terror techniques and killings of presumed opponents. In other locations, there were similar killer groups but with blessings from Kamal as he happened to be the eldest son of the top boss and Moni, the most powerful nephew of the same boss and the Jubo League chief. SP Mahbub was known also as the white Zeep force. They would use bullies and terror tactics to any who in their view would be any body of the opposition groups, the JSD, the banned party workers, underground party sympathizers, etc. They would harass the imagined enemies through rent seeking, physical torture in secret locations and killings as and when they would wish to do so. How about the liabilities of those facts of extra-judicial killings?

Sheikh Kamal’s fancy
Kamal had other fancy being a youthful one at the university class role to pick up and sexually harass girls at random and particularly the more beautiful ones. His father, may be that is why, got a promising university girl married to him despite her parents’ (University Engineer) unwillingness. That did not stop Kamal going after other girls, particularly of the university classes. One of my friends then lamented to me that his youngest sister, I knew her and a very beautiful one, then a first year honors philosophy student had to be withdrawn from the university class, gave her in marriage at that young age, and for better safety sent to England with her newly wed husband as the girl and the family felt insecure from the lust of Kamal.

Rakhhi Bahini
The euphemistically labeled as the Rakhhi Bahini but unconstitutional paramilitary force planned, trained, specifically motivated and armed profusely by the Indian central intelligence agency, R&AW under the Indian General Ovan constituted the notorious killer force of the top boss with all impunity. It was estimated that this force alone killed 11, 000 worker and mid level leaders of the JSD (Jatiya Samajtantrik Dal) alone, a post 1971 breakaway faction from the Awami League and the dedicatedly fierce freedom fighters of 1971. Another estimate had the figure of nearly 37,000 of all genres of opposition workers killed in three and half years of the first Awami League first term rule in independent Bangladesh. Were they not extra-judicial killings? People’s memory being short those facts had almost been lost in oblivion.

Nasim, Shamim, Hazari, Taher, etc
How about killer groups led by Nasim, Shamim, Hazari, Taher etc. who had all free license to kill whoever they would like and deem fit from the nod of the second term boss of the Awami League government (1996-2001)? How could people so soon forget that the top boss herself openly from the P.M.’s position commanded and gave open license to kill in reprisal ‘ten for one’? Let us recall that her verbatim in Bengali quoted by some fearless writers including the BBC famous Serajur Rahman, was ‘EKTAR BADALE DASHTA LASH CHAI’. She asked further that whoever of her cadres could not do the heroic job of killing ten for one he must wear bangles like girls/women.

I don’t have exact figures of all the extra-judicial killings during the second term of the Awami League at this moment. But apart from many killings in police custody that was certainly extra-judicial killings. I recall a killing of unknown person and then dumped the body in the Madarasa compound run by Shaikhul Hadis Allama Azizul Haq for implicating him in the murder case and to cow him down to the boss’s party. The Allama was jailed for this concocted case.

RAB
RAB or Rapid Action Battalion is a new special police force formed during the 2001-2006 term of the BNP government. Despite some errors made by the RAB operations that might amount to extra-judicial killings, their jobs done in the main were appreciated by the common peace loving people for obvious reason of huge increase of terrorists in the country not without good many reasons like unemployment, widening inequality between the poor and the rich; no less crucial is the syndrome of continuing erosion of moral values. The Awami had the promise to stop extra-judicial killings, but how could they do away with the right to self- defense of the law enforcing agencies, let alone of the RAB? But the government could put immediately the perpetrators to justice in the set rules of the organizations concerned.

Private hoodlums again
Private hoodlums of the old Awami League variety have been in operation once again in since the beginning of 2009. Rent seeking and extortions are not without rationale though as many of them are unemployed, yet needs money to run day- to- day party programs. Tender snatching businesses fetch bigger booties and division of quantum of booties at times lead to same side extra-judicial killings. These are the places and issues the government needs to give serious attention, because they are left off, at times, outside the due process of law of the law enforcing agencies for unknown reasons.

The orchestration in a sort of apparent distancing away from the new genre of hoodlums by resigning from formal position of the Student League did no qualitative change in the widespread anti-social businesses of the hoodlums. What is needed immediately to cage them all and let rule of law stay supreme unhindered for each and every issue. Let not propaganda alone take over the facts of extra-judicial killings of the past and of the present.

Author: Dr. M.T. Hussain

Zia That I Knew: A Flashback

(This is a story related to me by a friend, who preferred to remain anonymous)

Following my defection from Pakistan Army in 1971 and after being cleared by the Indian and Mujibnagar authorities, I was posted to ‘Z Force’ of Lt Col Ziaur Rahman in the eastern theater of Bangladesh liberation war. The nearly 20-day journey took me from Lahore to Khemkaran to Ferozepur to Delhi to Kolkata to Agartala and finally to Masimpur, the 4 sector headquarters of Lt Col C R Dutta (later Major General). As I reached my temporary accommodation, I heard a familiar voice next room. He was talking to Col Dutta. I went to check and found a gentleman in uniform, somewhat tired, half lying on the bamboo made platform, used as bed. It was dark and I could not see the face clearly. I wished him and introduced myself. He sat down and said, “So you are the Captain who came to raise my artillery unit. Sit down.”

I still could not make out who the person was, though looked familiar. 2/Lt Sajjad Ali Zahir (later Lt Col), another defectee from West Pakistan and posted to my unit, joined me at Agartala. He followed me to the room. As I introduced Sajjad to the man, almost instantly the name flashed across my mind.

“He is Col Ziaur Rahman”, I said to Sajjad. Earlier, then Major Ziaur Rahman was an instructor in the military academy when I was a cadet and his solid, deep voice was well known to me.

On his query, I had to tell Col Zia my defection story—how I crossed the Lahore-Khemkaran border in a military jeep, how I survived after falling with the jeep in the Kasur River, who I reported to at India’s Rajoke cantonment etc. He seemed to know the route and area pretty well. Somewhat surprised, I asked how he knew the names of those villages, tracks, BRB canal, barriers etc. “I was fighting the Indians there in 1965 with 1 E Bengal Regiment”, Zia said.

After dinner, Zia left for his headquarters at Kailashahar. Before leaving he told me to take stock of my unit at Kukital and report to him in a day or two to find out what I needed to make the unit battle worthy within the shortest possible time. Capt Oli Ahmed (later Col and BNP Minister) and my Sialkot time friend Capt M A Halim (later Maj Gen), Brigade Major and Quartermaster respectively at Z Force, were very helpful in providing me with the material support I needed.

Whole Bangladesh is Firing Range

About two weeks later, Col M A G Osmani (later General and Minister), C-in-C of the Mukti Bahini, was visiting the area. Zia brought him to my camp with a view to showing the readiness of my guns for operation. I arranged a mock gun firing drill for the visiting team. Lt (later Capt and late) Sheikh Kamal, ADC to the C-in-C, told me afterwards, “Sir, the C-in-C was very impressed with the exercise. I heard him saying so to Col Zia.” Of course, Osmani himself appreciated the preparedness and congratulated those who participated in the drill. At the luncheon at my camp, I asked him if I could conduct a practice firing before going to the real one, for which I needed a firing range.

“The whole Bangladesh is your firing range, my boy”, said Osmani, “go ahead.” He gave me a blank check.

After a day or two, while returning from forward positions, I noticed a large convoy of vehicles carrying soldiers passing by. Initially I thought they were Indians, but with a closer look I recognized they were our Mukti Bahini soldiers. In those days, we had the same OG (olive green) uniform worn by the Indian army in that area. After a while, I found Col Zia coming in a jeep. He stopped when he saw me. I asked him what was all that.

“That’s my 1st Bengal”, Zia brimmed with pride.
“Where are they going?” I asked.
He got off his jeep and asked me to follow him. We went up on a high ground from where we could oversee the convoy passing.
“They are going to Atgram, to take up positions in preparation for the attack on the Pakistanis”, Zia said as he was preparing to sit down. He briefly explained the plan for a 3-prong attack in north eastern Sylhet with his 1st, 3rd and 8th Bengal regiments.
“Am I not part of your brigade?” I asked, suppressing my disappointment.
“Of course you are”, Zia asserted.
“Then why am I left out of this?” I demanded.
“Are you ready?” he asked me.
“Anytime”, I replied.

I cannot describe in words the expression of happiness and pride that I noticed in Zia’s face at that moment.

“Fine”, he said, “you are going in support of 8th Bengal, possibly tonight. On my way, I will talk to Brigadier (I don’t remember the name who was Zia’s Indian support counterpart) to issue the ammunition and gun towers (trucks) to you on a priority basis. See me at headquarters later tonight. I will give you further details.”

My excitement knew no bounds and was about to run away to arranged the details for the D-day I was waiting for.

Fight the War Our Way

“Wait, sit down”, Col Zia stopped me, “there is time. Give me company while I see my unit clear away.” As the convoy moved on, our discussion shifted to different directions. I told him how Pakistanis in the west had been conducting misleading propaganda about our war, our heroes and our future. In Pakistan, Zia and many others were already dead. I discovered a different Zia from the reclusive and serious one that most people knew. It looked like he wanted to open his mind.

We talked about the war, the strategy, its conduct and the policy makers in Mujibnagar. He expressed his frustration at the style and pace the war was going. He didn’t like too much dependence on India for the conduct of our war.

“It is our war, we should fight it our way, not on someone else’s convenience”, he said. He did not hide his dislike for Col Osmani, the Mukti Bahini chief. “That man with white moustache”, Zia said referring to Osmani, “has no idea about the situation in the war fronts and the enemy. Just passing orders off the map at someone else’s dictation. I don’t like it”.

I was a bit embarrassed that he would open up like that with a subordinate and junior officer. But I also knew Zia, for whatever reasons, developed a liking for me and could confide. Our association continued till I met the president last in September 1980.

The sun was setting when we got up to leave. I told Col Zia that I could be late to reach his headquarters tonight because I had a number of errands to complete before I moved out. “Don’t worry”, Zia assured me, “I don’t go to bed early”. I later learnt that Zia usually worked till early hours of the morning in those days. He slept very little.

I came to Zia’s headquarters around 11 pm and found him working in his tent, dimly lighted by a lantern. Our meeting was brief. He showed me the deployment of 8 Bengal Regiment off the map and I was to place guns suitably to support its attacks and advances. He called his BM Capt Oli and DQ Capt Halim to provide me whatever I needed.

My unit’s first operation in Baralekha, Sylhet was a huge success. Next morning, an overjoyed Col Zia, accompanied by Capt Oli, visited my gun position. Greeting with a warm handshake, he told me, “You made history in our liberation war”. He went round and shook hands and congratulated every man I had. Before Col Zia left, I told him that I would be going to the forward locations of 8 Bengal as FOO (Forward Observation Officer) soon.

“Make sure the gun position is well taken care of. These guns are very precious for us”, Zia advised.
“It is in good hand, sir”, I assured him.

Sometime in 1973, then army deputy chief Maj Gen Ziaur Rahman was on a visit to Chittagong where I was a staff officer to Col (later Lt Gen and BNP Minister) Mir Shawkat Ali, the local commander. At a luncheon for Zia at the commander’s Flag Staff House where Brigadier Khalilur Rahman (later Maj Gen, Defense Adviser to Khandakar Mushtaque and AL MP), just repatriated from Pakistan, was also present. Zia and Khalil were discussing our liberation war. At one stage, Zia called me to tell the brigadier how I raised my artillery unit and how long it took me to train and make it ready for the war.

“The whole thing took me less than 3 weeks”, I said.
A skeptical brigadier asked, “If you are given the men and material, would you be able to accomplish the same now?”
“Definitely, sir; however, it may take a little longer time,” I replied.
“Please bear in mind, sir”, I added, “it was wartime, that too a liberation war. Our only mission was to fight and win. We used every minute of our time, day and night, to get ready. I had some excellent trained artillery men from former Pakistan army. They formed the core, the rest were ordinary soldiers, students and others. You got to see their spirit to believe it, sir. The beauty was, the unit that went to operation on a Ramadan afternoon without prior practice firing, had its very first shell falling right on the target, a Pakistani concentration in Baralekha, Sylhet, readying for an attack on 8 Bengal positions. That unexpected (Pakistanis never knew before that Mukti Bahini had artillery power) and devastating artillery shelling forced the disarrayed enemy to start a process of retreat leading to a complete defeat in that area.”

I could see a proud Gen Zia enjoying our conversation standing nearby. He perhaps desired to highlight my contributions in our liberation war to the one who missed that chance.

The Revolt in Chittagong

Once at Kailashahar, Capt Oli told me the story how 8 E Bengal revolted at Halishahar in Chittagong on the night of March 25, 1971. The facts were later corroborated by Major Shamsher M Chowdhury, a batch mate (later Foreign Secretary and Ambassador to the US), Brigadier Chowdhury Khaluquzzaman (later Ambassador), and Capt Mahfuzur Rahman (later Lt Col and hanged following the assassination of Zia). They were all serving in 8 Bengal at that time.

Lt Col M R Chowdhury of East Bengal Recruits’ Center (EBRC), Major Ziaur Rahman, Second-in-Command of 8 Bengal, Capt Rafiqul Islam (later Major and AL Minister) of East Pakistan Rifles and a few other officers had a number of secret coordinating meetings in Chittagong to cope with the situation if Pakistanis attacked the Bengalis. They sent messages to Sheikh Mujibur Rahman to inform that Pakistanis were preparing to disarm and attack the Bengali elements of the military and sought his advice and direction. They did not receive any. (Please see “A Tale of Millions” by Major Rafiqul Islam.)

On the night of March 25, 1971, operation Search Light, designed to annihilate the Bengalis by Pakistan Army, started in the cantonments, including Chittagong. Shamsher confirmed that elements of 20 Baluch and 31 Punjab regiments were advancing towards Halishahar. 8 Bengal then decided to revolt and resist the Pakistanis. They arrested the Pakistani officers, including the Commanding Officer Lt Col Rashid Janjua (these officers were later killed) and wanted Ziaur Rahman to take command. At that moment, Zia was being taken, under naval escorts, to the Chittagong port, ostensibly to help unload the Chinese armaments from HMV Swat. According to other versions, Zia was actually on his way to his final journey! Khaliquzzaman rushed to get Zia and luckily found him waiting by the roadside while his escorts were clearing a barricade at Agrabad area. Khaliquzzaman whispered to Zia of the decision of 8 Bengal and then went to the navy Lt to say that Col Ansari, the new Punjabi Commandant at the EBRC, wanted Zia at Chittagong cantonment immediately. The Punjabi Lt did not suspect any foul play.

Zia and Khaliquzzaman rushed to the unit and found a truncated unit ready for action. Half of the men deserted out of fear and confusion. Major Shawkat recently arrived from Quetta after completing staff college course and was temporarily appointed Adjutant of 8 Bengal. As he was new in the unit, other officers could not take him into confidence at first. Some young officers were not sure if Shawkat was a Bengali at all. Shawkat was at his quarter and knew nothing about all that was going in the unit at that moment. Upon arrival, Zia went to Shawkat and asked if he would join the revolt. Shawkat thought for a while and then decided to join the group.

Though 8 Bengal readied itself to meet the attacking Pakistanis, they were outnumbered. Zia decided to fall back to Kalurghat and reorganize. They fought pitch battles and suffered heavy casualties in the process. Capt Harun Ahmed Chowdhury (later Maj Gen and Ambassador), Shamsher and others were mortally wounded and captured by the Pakistanis.

Here on March 27, 1971, Zia made his famous declaration of independence at the Kalurghat Radio Station. According to Oli, he was instrumental in the making of the declaration. He even claimed to have made Zia. Shamsher told me that he drafted the final version of the declaration. So much for the controversy over the declaration of independence made by Sheikh Mujibur Rahman on the night of March 25, 1971.

Audacity to Distort Zia’s Role

Lately, a few AL ministers and parliamentarians started disputing Zia’s participation in the war of liberation. Former minister Prof Abu Syed and one Dr. Mina Farah of New York, who chose to incinerate her Muslim son instead of burial, had the audacity to claim in recent talk shows that Zia was not a freedom fighter at all. I can only say that these persons need to get their brain checked.

Special Mission

In September 1980, I was sent to Dhaka on a special mission concerning military cooperation in one of the middle-eastern countries. My meetings with Minister Prof Shamsul Huq and Foreign Secretary SHMS Kibria were not positive. Army chief General H M Ershad and chief of the general staff Maj Gen Abdul Manaf were hesitant. I wanted to talk to the president. While I was waiting in the office of the Military Secretary to the President Col Sadequr Rahman Chowdhury in Bangabhaban, President Zia suddenly burst in and asked me, without any prelude, “What kind of proposal is it? How can we agree to this? We have no capability to undertake such a task. Besides, we can’t afford to enter into a kind of rivalry with a superpower.”

I understood the president came straight from the meeting deliberating on the same issue. While coming to the Bangabhaban, I saw Ershad there.

“Sir, give me a few minutes”, I requested the president, “and I will explain the stake involved, how it can be made possible and what we stand to gain. There is no superpower rivalry, and I believe you were not given the correct picture by our foreign office.” The president tried to defend the foreign office though.

We sat down and I stated what I thought right. I also said something to the president in confidence which only I could dare say. I pointed out that peripheral and invisible resources (I even listed those resources) of our military would be more than enough to make an initial commitment. In return, we can seek financial assistance and resources to raise more units, modernize, equip and train our forces. It would be an ongoing process.

That did the job! I could see a glow in the face of the president.

“Please do not say ‘NO’, sir,” I begged the president, further adding, “for the first time, a rich friend requested Bangladesh for something”.

“Wait a moment”, he told me and turned to the MSP, “Sadeq, get hold of Ershad, he was leaving. I need to talk to him again”. The president went out of the room and I was hoping for the best.

After half an hour, the president came back and told me, “Ok, you tell them, we accept the proposal in principle. But, we need to discuss further. We may have to send a team of experts to examine the details”.
“Thank you, sir. But, it needs to be conveyed by our foreign office”, I humbly submitted.
“I will talk to the foreign minister,” the president said.

A little relaxed, I now had time to exchange usual pleasantries with the president. At one stage, he picked up a newspaper, I thought it was Holiday, from the desk of the MSP and proudly showed me a news item that said Bangladesh would export certain type of quality rice.
“How can we do that?” It was my time to be surprised now.
“We will do it, you will see”, asserted a confident president.

I later learnt that the Foreign Office maintained its original position. I felt a huge overseas opportunity for our defense forces was sabotaged. (I am unable to detail the opportunity here).

That was the last time I saw Shaheed President Ziaur Rahman.

After his death, I went to Bangladesh on vacation. My wife and I visited a bereaved Begum Zia at her residence. Brigadier Mahtab (late), an old friend, was with me. Begum Zia talked very little, but acknowledged receipt of my condolence letter. In course of our discussion, she asked me, “What do you think should happen now and how the things should be run?” I could not figure out what she meant. Mahtab clarified that who I should think to take the leadership and carry forward ideals of Zia at that juncture.

I was not prepared for such a question and had no idea what Begum Zia was trying to lead me to, least of all her political ambition.

I just fumbled that if anybody could come close to the stature of Ziaur Rahman, I thought it would be General M A Manzur. Unfortunately, he was the man behind the assassination of the president. (At that time, we were made to believe it was Manzur who masterminded the bloody coup in Chittagong. Later, however, I had different view about Manzur’s complicity.) I expressed my inability to name a successor to Zia.

Years later, I said to myself in retrospect, “Stupid, the right answer should have been: you Madam.”

In a letter to General Ershad commending his efforts in quelling the Chittagong rebellion, I said, ‘given the peoples’ love and respect Shaheed President Zia received (reportedly 2 million people gathered around Dhaka airport when his coffin was brought in from Chittagong and attended his final Janaza), a Zia-like death is worth million times’. I also submitted that he had huge responsibilities for the stability in the military, as well as the nation. Ershad was kind enough to reply saying he was ‘working’ on some ideas and would seek our support. I later learnt what he was ‘working’ on.

We Have Been Orphaned

I went to the Bangabhaban again, this time to see Justice Abdus Sattar, the acting president. As I was waiting at the office of Col S R Chowdhury, the MSP related an experience. While on a visit to Zia’s mazaar at one night, he found an old man crying by the grave. Sadeq went to share the feelings and console the man. He came all the way from Rangpur to pay his respect to the shaheed president. “‘Badsha’ Zia had walked through my front yard”, the old man continued to cry, “how can I forget that? We have been orphaned.”

During a courtesy call on Maj Gen Mohabbat Jan Chowdhury (later Minister of Ershad), Director General of Forces Intelligence (DGFI), I asked how come his intelligence failed when such a tragedy took place in Chittagong? Gen Chowdhury said that they knew something was in the offing in Chittagong and warned the president accordingly, but the president did not take it seriously. They also reminded the president on more than one occasion that Gen Manzur was going out of control, often refused to follow orders and instructions from army headquarters and mostly did things his way. According to M J Chowdhury, the president never believed them; he would rather rebuke them (repatriated and non-freedom fighter officers) instead, saying that they were jealous of Manzur who was far more superior in intellect and competence.

A footnote: The President’s rehabilitation of the repatriated officers in high positions in the military enraged the young freedom fighter officers. The coup that killed the president was staged by freedom fighter officers. During a discussion with Gen Manzur in his office in Chittagong in 1979, I discovered how bitter he was against the non-freedom fighters. At the same time, I knew Zia and Manzur enjoyed great cordiality, mutual confidence and close relation. After the November 7, 1975 Sepoy-Janata Uprising, situation in the military was almost out of control and its discipline was at its lowest. Zia brought in Brig Manzur from New Delhi, where he was the military adviser, and appointed him the chief of the general staff. It was Manzur who brought back order in the military.

Incorruptible Zia

President Ziaur Rahman’s austere and honest lifestyle was legendary. Even his worst enemy can not dispute that. Critics, however, blamed him for doing little against corrupt practices of some of his ministers and political leaders.

In late 1972, I called on then Brigadier Zia at his residence to introduce my newly married wife. Other than being overwhelmed with the extraordinary beauty of Begum Zia, my wife noticed that Zia was wearing an ordinary leather sandal having repairs done.

It was a common knowledge what was found in Zia’s broken suitcase at the Chittagong Circuit House following his assassination on May 30, 1981—a few change of clothes that included a torn vest.

Here is a story I heard from Hussain Ahmed, a former IGP and Secretary. An SP came to his residence at a late hour of night with a request to cancel his posting to a distant place. A much annoyed IGP dismissed the request. Before leaving, the disappointed SP pointed to his accompanying gentleman who remained absolutely silent the whole time, “Sir, do you know him?” The IGP replied in negative. “He is Mizanur Rahman, brother of the President”, said the SP. Naturally, the IGP became a little soft and more accommodating now and asked the SP to see him in the office. He, however, did not recall if that request was ever met.

Later, the IGP casually related the story to Air Vice Marshal Islam, then DGFI. A day or two later, IGP’s red phone rang at around 3 am. Somewhat disturbed to be awakened at that odd hour, he picked up the phone and received a thunder.

“I heard that b—— went to you for a favor?” It was the president and it took time for the IGP to understand what he was referring to. The IGP tried to pacify the president saying that his brother just accompanied the SP and did not utter a word at all. “I would like to have a full report tomorrow”, the president insisted and dropped the phone.

Reportedly, president Ziaur Rahman sent out circulars to all departments that personal requests by his family members should be directed to him immediately.

Everybody knew the fact that Zia refused to intervene when his son Tarique was thrown out of Shaheen School.

During an official visit to Zambia, High Commissioner A N Hamidullah was briefing the president on the program, repeatedly mentioning of an appointment with president’s brother Rezaur Rahman who was working there as an engineer. The president did not like it. He rebuked the High Commissioner for putting his brother’s appointment in the official program. “I know my brother is here. I will meet him at my own convenience, and it is my personal matter”, the president reminded the High Commissioner.

Another story from Hussain Ahmed. The almost daily Bangabhaban evening meetings used to run for long hours and working dinners were served from the house. The menu was more than simple–rice or roti with one curry and dal. Minister Moudud Ahmed found difficulty to take that any more. At dinner time, he requested the president if he could be excused as he had promised his children to eat together. The president smiled and let him go.

One may recall that Ziaur Rahman introduced Toyota Corolla as the official car at all levels, including for himself. A few Mercedes that Bangabhaban had were used only for foreign dignitaries during official visits.

Alas, the Zia family seemed to have failed to keep the clean image that Zia had in his lifetime!

Author: Abu Obaid Chowdhury New York, USA

LTTE’s Rise and Fall:Indira’s Prompting and Hegemony

Tamils and Indira Gandhi
Is it not an astonishing matter that the LTTE’s who once controlled one third of the Sri Lanka’s territory and had a war of resistance for liberation for 26 years failed and defeated by the Sri Lanka’s Army at the end on the 18th May 2009 encircled in a patch of jungle of about 1.5 sq km? In the war the Tamil rebels demanding independent state for the ethnic Tamils at the north and east of Sri Lanka had fighting force of 10,000 regulars and their own Navy and Air Force, as well. They had their own administration and even school system organized and run for years. Money, arms and ammunitions were not in short supply that had its first seed money from the Indian Tamils well known to be sponsored in early 1970s and vigorously supported since then in her life time directly by the Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi (1917-1984) and her central intelligence agency, the R&AW.

Indira’s goal of hegemony
Indira along with her R&AW intelligence operatives not only prompted the Young Tamil LTTE leader Provakaran for obviously then getting votes of the Tamil people of south India, on the one hand, and had also had her eyes, on the other, for dominance through hegemony in the region around that historians know well that the India Doctrine duly nurtured not only by Indira’s father first Prime Minister of independent India Pandit Nehru but also with more aggressive audacity by her.

Ramrajya in Akhand Bharat
Though Nehru posed as an atheist which Indira did not but as a Sanatanist, they had both presented them to the common simple poor folk Hindus of India in millions and millions as the firm believers in re-establishing the epical RAMRAJYA or the Kingdom of God Ram in AKHANDA BHARAT or Undivided India not only limited to the present boundary of India but also much beyond from the Bali Island in the far East of Indonesia to the out stretch of Afghanistan bordering Iranian territory. Sri Lanka was in no way outside their view in the matter. Forcible occupation of Junagardh, Manvadar, Hyderabad, Goa, Jammu and Kashmir in 1947-48, Sikkim in early 1975, etc. are part of the game, as one of their retired Army General Shanaker Roy Chowdhury termed recently in the Asian Age (London edition) as the GREAT GAME they had set for the re-establishing that epical AKHANDA BHARAT. Nepal and Bangladesh are there in the same game that India seriously turned in 2009.

Indira and bloods
It was not too late when Indira lost her elder son Sanjay in a plane crash. Soon she herself gave blood (31 bullets found in her dead body by operating doctors) in the hands of her own Sikh body- guards, Beant (shot dead right then) and Satwant (hanged later on), on the 31st October 1984 that came about as a sequence in four months after the vicious so-called Operation Blue Star carried out in the Golden Temple (Akal Takht) at Amritsar, the holiest of the Sikh temples that had the pool of bloods of 3000 lives of the Sikhs then led by Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale who had also been killed in the operation, a proponent of the Khalistan State or the separate independent homeland of the Indian Sikhs. Indira’s other son who took over after Indira’s death and the P.M. Rajib earlier hit on his neck by a Sri Lankan soldier in a state parade fortunately survived and then tragically gave life and blood in May 1991 by the suicidal attackers of the LTTE’s; Provakaran was listed as the main suspect for Rajib’s killing in the suicide attack.

Distancing
Rajib’s killing by suspected LTTEs naturally created distance between the R&AW and the Congress party, on one side, and the LTTE, on the other. Even so, for appeasement of the Tamils of India, Congress maintained some apparent sympathy for the LTTE and the war. That was understandably a ploy to keep Sri Lanka under India’s control of hegemony as she has been engineering against other smaller countries in the region, possibly except nuclear Pakistan but not without interference into many of her internal matters.

Raised hopes
The LTTE raised hopes of the Tamil people for a State of their own. The South Indian Tamil people had sympathy for the movement. Tamils living in the outside world helped the movement with huge money and other external logistic support. They had also high hopes for the new country for they were told repeatedly that in Sri Lanka they had been second-class citizens. These Tamils may not forget the issue right away. They would naturally feel alienated from the Singhalese and Sri Lankan administration, as they had been psychologically conditioned to be for long 26 years. Whether the Singhalese President Rajapakse with his hopefully integration and assimilation policy would soon win the hearts and minds of the Tamil people is hard to foresee. Instead there may not be any wonder if new leadership takes up the Tamil Elam issue to fill up the void, once they reconcile to the death of Provakoron.

Bloods for power game
It is estimated that nearly 70,000 people died in the 26 years war. It is a huge cost of blood. History would assess and record that Indira Gandhi owed much for the blood letting in this war in Sri Lanka, because, it was she who engineered the game beginning in early 1970s. Had she not started the nasty game, Tamil issue would not have surfaced, much less LTTE and Provakaron, because, all Sri Lankans lived as peaceful citizens of the same country together since independence in February 1948 and the 13% Tamils had no significant rationale to become independent as against 73% Singhalese and other smaller minorities.

Author:Dr. M.T. Hussain

Personal Guilts versus Institutional Liabilities

That a weighty organization of international fame has urged the Bangladesh Government to ban the functioning of the RAB and the DGFI though has some point to ponder about but could only be suicidal if taken seriously for consideration.

The RAB or the Rapid Action Battalion of Bangladesh formed some years ago for containing more effectively the rising crimes and of their ever-increasing manifestations that the normal police force with backlogs of the past could do but not that quite efficiently. I am not aware of everything of the new organization, but we had certain effectiveness that the people appreciated from the beginning. Despite their effectiveness, they had also lapses, particularly in the matter of the ‘cross fire deaths’. Provided these undesirable incidents could be eliminated, there should be no grumbling about their operation and effectiveness. I am sure that there is no peace-loving citizen who is not seriously worried about the rising crimes and criminalities in the society that effective deterrent like the BAB could contain appreciably. But that is not enough, neither could only physical deterrents alone do it efficiently; what is more needed is to reorganize thought processes of our younger generation through moral reinforcement by way of our original Islamic values and tradition of TAQWA.

So far as the DGFI (Defense Forces Intelligence) issue is concerned the suggestion by the organization to ban its operation, and possibly the organization itself wholesale is ridiculous. That I am sure clearly implied wholesale liquidation of the Armed Forces of Bangladesh as some elements have been making suggestion for some time back How could one think of a defense force comprising three major wings- army, air and navy- and yet nothing to keep on intelligence surveillance into their operational issues and further than those of external matters linked to various secrets of the armed forces. Security of any country is not only things internal in the armed forces but more so in possible outside issues that remain in activities of other people too outside the forces.

Well, if the activities of the RAB and the defense forces intelligence, at any time, amount to interference of liberty of common citizens that should not be acceptable. But again, if such activities amount to treasonable offence in secret, and yet not traceable and not rounded up by civilian intelligence units, why could not the RAB’s and the army intelligence units be employed to do needful bits in such relevant matters?

Excesses may be complained of and rightly so. Any such excess may not be difficult to identify and persons responsible for any guilt may well be taken into custody and handed in to the due process of law. Onus of personal liability of any guilt should be one’s own and may not be shifted to and burdened on the institution the person may have been working. This should be a simple task not to be confused with the offender’s parent organization.

The organization proposing the banning of these two useful organizations has suggested nothing different as throwing the baby away with the bath water.

Author: M.T. Hussain

25-26 February Carnage and Hush Ups

Delays
As the Inquiry committee of the Army, one of the three, already submitting their report stated that they had to restrain on some relevant issues in reporting about known facts, and the other committee sought more time, eleven weeks gone by as against the initially promised one week, to gather facts and compile reports for reasons known to them, and still the third one limping on, it made obviously reasonable to presume without any doubt that there are hush ups going on in the 25-26 February massacre of 64 highly prized lives and not less valuable other ten in the BDR Head Quarter premises in the metropolitan city of Dhaka not without knowledge of those most relevantly involved.

Secrecy
It is not to say that some secrecy by the ruling government on the very sensitive issue like the one of the February massacre is useless or unnecessary. The government has the power to keep certain things secret on any matter that they would consider important and critical for a particular period. But ultimately nothing remains secret for all time to come. Even the highly classified documents are normally declassified for public information and knowledge after about three decades in many countries. But the reports of factual inquiry of the BDR carnage can hardly be any classified document except that some very high ups inside the country particularly connected to the ruling party’s core insiders or and else some outside the country that if pin pointed out may pose image problem, foreign relations complicacy and increased danger for security of Bangladesh.

Threats
Bangladesh is not a very big geographical unit though in population size it is the 8th largest one in the world, but unfortunately encircled by the powerful, closest and mighty neighbor. Bangladesh has persistent threats from this neighbor on all fronts. There is as such host of things for any government in Dhaka to get scared of this giant neighbor ever ready to grind their own axe in attaining their goal in the region. Incidentally, the government of present Bangladesh is well known to be the good guy of this big neighbor.

Averse
The other worrying thing is that this government has been constantly averse to anything of the army that fits well in the format of control of the big neighbor’s goals in the region for power hegemony. Based on these realities, it is only likely that the harm done to both the BDR and the Army benefited most this neighbor in terms of further neutralizing their eastern frontier of 42,000 km zigzag and ‘moth-eaten’ land and water borders. In the1971 historic victory they had fully neutralized these borders, but some how afterwards the Bangladesh Army and the BDR have been reorganized and set to protect sovereignty of Bangladesh in any likely future war in defensive mode that naturally became once again eye sore of the ‘big brother’. Such likely reason may also logically be taken having had their hand in the whole make up of the mayhem.

Pliant
Their pliant guys in Dhaka would in no way bring to light any involvement of the ‘big brother’ simply because, in any such disclosure their allegiance to the boss of Delhi and Kolkata would be put to lack of credibility only to harm the subordinate bosses stationed in Dhaka. In addition, it may further be quite likely that in the late February mayhem quite a few guys of the same genre close to the P.M. as were earlier known in medias that the government for their own sake needs also to hide and hush up.

Congress’s victory
The likely hush up business has certainly got a boost in the aftermath of the victory of the Congress combine UPA government in Delhi for they have been keeping deep rapport with the party in power as at present in Bangladesh that surpassed more than that in the person of the Bangladesh P.M Sheikh Hasina who remains more than anyone else in Bangladesh closely conditioned and psychologically groomed for six years during the formative period of her psyche in politics vis a vis Indian goal that the their central intelligence agency R&AW did with utmost care following her fathers fall from power in Dhaka on the 15th August 1975. She was made a maniac so much so that she developed deep hatred not only for the army as the army men did bring her fathers fall and death but also for Bangladesh politics. The psychic hatred very appropriately fitted into the big brother’s design very well.

Reprisal alone
It may not be out of place to mention here two facts. The BBC Bengali Service retired journalist Serajur Rahman in a recent article published in a Dhaka Bengali daily noted with full authenticity that Hasina did not refute yet in about two months that she hated politics but took it up only for the sole purpose of reprisal of her father’s killing. Her Bengali verbatim was, ‘AMI RAJNITI GHRINA KORI KINTU PITRI HATYAR PROTISHODH NEAR JONYAI RAJNITITE ESHECHI’.

Vengeance
That her politics so far has been notoriously marked by vengeance need no prove with examples here as they are all very much well known and going on every day at this point of time. Even so, it may be mentioned here the way she during her first term hounded the heroes of the 15th August welcome change, the ‘killers’, in her given label, and did manipulate the judicial process that made the worst of miscarriage of justice during 1996 to 2001. She did not stop there, and went further on in the election campaign in late 2001 wherein she appealed to the voters that she could not finish hanging the ‘killers’ and to do the hanging by herself all must vote for her and her party to win and form the government for the second go in October 2001 (AR EKBAR AMAKE VOTE DIN JATE AMI NIJ HATE JATIR JANAKER KHUNIDER FANSITE JHULATE PARI). Unfortunately, her party was miserably defeated in that election. Neither the party combined that won the election of 2001 having had been the best beneficiary of the 15th August revolutionary change did do anything to end the miscarriage of justice done during Hasina’s first term. Now that the Congress has returned to power in Delhi in May 2009 signals even more seriously that Hasina emboldened by the support of Delhi would not only finish up the 15th August heroes but also the BDR and the Army of Bangladesh, as well. The BDR mayhem orchestrated in late February had been the beginning of the end of the viable defense system of Bangladesh that if could be materialized in full Hasina, Rahana and Joy could inherit the Dhaka throne even if that would only be similar to the fate of Sheikh Abdullah of Kashmir, if not of formerly independent Sikkim’s Lendup Darji.
The hush up clearly seen cannot be isolated anything from the foreseeable goal as is made a hunch herewith.

Author: Dr.M.T Hussain

Witch Hunting of Qaomi Madarasa 2009 Style

Witch hunting of Muslim elementary learning
Not anything different from earlier, much less anything desirable but in the old style of witch hunting by the Awami League government as they tried and failed before during the two other terms once again is on that may be termed witch hunting 2009 style. I would try here not of all genres but on the one only in the matter of Muslim children education at the elementary level.

Committee chief versus private citizen
The Parliamentary standing committee on education chief honorable National Assembly Member as his comment published in a national Bengali daily on the10th May that he did not consider Qaomi Madarasa learning anything of education. He had his own idea and view of things that he is free to hold. I may not say anything about his opinion in the matter, and so he could further hold on and assert his own power of the sovereign parliament in the matter. But I cannot ignore my honest feeling and so take this opportunity to express my own opinion about the matter.

British Parliamentary tradition
If we look back a bit seriously and think about the parliamentary tradition in relevance to the matter, we must have the British Parliamentary tradition for guidance. The British Parliament has not only sovereign power subject to the Sovereign power of the Crown but also as they maintain, ‘can do everything except a man a woman or a woman a man’. I would suppose that Bangladesh parliament has also the same level of power as that of the British Parliament as we follow the same model, at least, in facade though not, I am afraid, in quality of content of deliberations as at present, but could be, hopefully, in future.

Sovereignty and personal freedom
Let us ponder over about another point. British people are not the sovereign but the Crown. Sovereignty of the British people and of the British Parliament is subordinate to the Crown. Why this is still so, is a different matter. But the fact of the gamut is that allegiance of the people is divided between the Crown, the power of the Parliament, to the land and geography of Britain and to the rule of law. Despite so much of items of allegiance to, the personal liberty is no less a mean issue but almost equally big one.

Parents option first
One important personal liberty each individual enjoys and so the parents that each and every parents has exclusive option for education of his/her children. The underlying main reason is that it is the parents who gave life to each child and none else. That is why he/she reserves the right to what learning and education he/she would decide to offer to his /her children. The provision of parents’ option known as ‘opting in’ or ‘opting out’ in case of religious lessons is a proof of priority of parents’ choice by passing even the State prescriptions for curriculum. The so-called English Public Schools like Eaton, Harrow, Winchester, etc. but in fact, private schools of exclusive nature and high standard having almost no control of the State or the Government some organized about five hundred years ago by some elite conservatives and also for children of selected parents that also obviously implied parental choice for curriculum for one’s offspring. This is taken to be matter of exclusive personal liberty of the parents that none took away yet, not even the state or even the sovereign power.

Parents options and indoctrination
Although most of the liberal educationists do not accept indoctrination for the plea of socialization as anything of education but only simple brainwashing as it hinders full blooming of children’s potentials obviously in a narrower way that the regimented socialist education curriculum promotes; that could be a hindrance to liberal minded parental free choice of learning materials for his/her children.

One and a half millennium
Qaomi Madarasa keeps up the tradition of the Muslims developed over the one and a half millennium. Parents and communities all over the world, not alone in independent Muslim nations, have kept it going in the tradition. Parents willingly send their children to these institutions. It is a wrong impression that only the poor parents take to this learning for their children. There is no bar that the children sent to Qaomi Madarasa stick to this learning and not beyond. In many cases, after finishing the Qaomi system pupils go and enter even secular general schools. I had the same experience in 1940s, because my parents wanted that way. They disliked me going to secular school direct without making me go beforehand through learning of the Quran in the family run Qaomi Madarasa.

Seventh century initial model
That the Qaomi Madarasa system of the Islamic learning has survived in the Muslim communities since the beginning of the Medina days in the seventh century proves not only its acceptability and popularity but also self-sustaining ability. Parental preference did not lack but remained deep for the learning.

No inhibition for Improvement
It may be that the system may have scopes for improvement in curriculum to keep up with modern needs and for blooming of all inborn innate abilities but that does not mean that the system must be abandoned wholesale.

Atheists agenda and pluralism
It’s true that the agenda of few atheists holding high position is different. But if any such agenda is unpalatable to the Muslim psyche, how that could be imposed from the top? Bangladesh is a plural and democratic country and not a regimented one of any variety of the atheists that they reserved all rights to impose whatever they wished from the top.

Both secular and spiritual
To the Muslims, education is not only a preparation for vocational ends but also at the same time for spiritual goal of natural human life not arbitrarily adopted without any rationale but for inherent human urge and demand for it. No sovereign power of any level could do anything inhibiting this goal of human life that is essentially needed, if not for anything else but for the day today peaceful living of human souls in this world. The Qaomi Madarasas are neither burden of anybody nor their graduates someone’s burdens in the society. Be the real matters as briefly presented above one must wonder if the volleys of evil propaganda against the Qaomi Madarasas en-bloc is yet another witch hunting against the oldest institutional learning tradition of the good Muslims.

Author:M.T. Hussain

13 Dead ‘War Criminals’ of Bangladesh Summoned to the Court!

Historically memorable
11th May was a memorable day for Bangladesh Judiciary. On this day, a lower court has issued summons to 36 alleged war criminals of 1971, nothing beyond authority, none, much less, I can say anything that may be subjudice, to be present by to the court by the 20th July 2009. Of these 13 are in the afterworld. The 23 surviving, I am sure, would present their stand in the court for hearing. Obviously they would take defense of the charges against them. I need not say anything about them. But out of the 13 dead, I had two known and I should say somewhat closer to me in their late in life. Now I feel that as they cannot present themselves in the court, I may say a few things on behalf of them. They are late Khawja Khairuddin (died and buried in Karachi) and late Mahmud Ali (buried in Islamabad National Graveyard).

Marhum Khawja Khairuddin, Marhum Mahmud Ali and Marhum Sheikh Mujib
Both Khawja Khairuddin and Mahmud Ali happened to be of the same generation of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman. They all fought as Muslim League workers of the Pakistan movement in 1940s. Soon after Pakistan was established comprising two wings nearly 1000 miles apart, West Pakistan and East Pakistan, on the historic day of the 14 August 1947, they all remained committed to the new country born almost from ‘scratch’ as American Professor Brianbatti found and termed the creation.

Fell apart
However they soon fell apart not on the question of preservation of the sovereign entity of the country but on how best they could serve it in their own way. Mahmud Ali formed the Gantri Party, Mujibur Rahman took to the path of Maolana Bhashani and Huseyn Shahid Sorawardy in the Awami League and Khawja Khairuddin as before stuck to the Muslim League, the party whose founding he took pride in of his ancestor Nawab Salimullh, and the party that put up the relentless and uncompromising Jihad for curving out Pakistan territory from the British India and from the evil clutches of the Hindu chauvinist of the Congress party, as well. In fact, Khawja Saheb until the last day of his life stuck to the Muslim League and its Pakistan ideology of Muslim nationhood in the Indian subcontinent.

Pakistan Survived acrimony
Despite their differences and acrimony inside Pakistan, East and West Pakistan stayed one sovereign country for 24 years until 1971.

1971 crisis deepened
In 1971 internal crisis took a new dimension as to whether the unity and sovereignty of Pakistan would be preserved or not. One group thought that the two wings must part away from one another as two sovereign countries, the other group wished that the two wings remain together as before as one sovereign country for strength to survive in the power game in the subcontinent. The three persons in reference here subscribed to the same latter group. Mahmud Ali and Khawja Saheb quite openly stood for the unity and Mujib being the elected leader of the East Pakistan in the 1970 December election remained discrete for his passionate followers to make wild guesses and decide their future course of action. Mujib took the safest course to get arrested and stayed in detention in West Pakistan by the Federal Army government but his followers in large number took refuge in India, sought their help and finally waged a war in connivance with the Indian government. Mujib was in his absence from the actual happenings given an imputed label that he had the prior consent for the war of dismemberment of Pakistan. Thus when the war ended, albeit, in the absence and beyond knowledge of Mujib, he was further given another imputed value that he made the founder of the newly labeled independent country Bangladesh in the soil of East Pakistan following the aftermath of the defeat and surrender of the Pakistan Army to the Indian Army General Arora on the 16th December 1971.

The 13 day war
The actual war for 13 days in December, however, was preceded by a civil commotion inside East Pakistan, one for preservation of Pakistan’s unity and integrity and the other for complete secession of East Pakistan and make Bangladesh independent. The division and commotion naturally had some infighting that caused incidents of unpleasant features including loss of lives on both sides, not of one side alone.

Mujib retuned hero
In early January 1972, Mujib was set free by the President Zulfi Bhutto of dismembered Pakistan (West). On return to Dhaka on the 10th January he took over formally the administration of Bangladesh that euphemistically said to have had been run by the government in ‘exile’ for nine months from mid April to December 1971 but in reality under Delhi’s surveillance and practical management. One of his action programs fell as a sword on those who did not share his ideas of the Awami League. They were already being sized up, their properties forcibly taken away by hoodlums at their free will, many tortured in inhuman nature, killed in various inhuman modes, fortunate ones arrested alive and put behind the bars. All parties believing in the one Pakistan ideology had been banned. Mujib turning a hero in absentia further planned to size up those of the opposite camp still alive but could be competitor in future by enacting an act, President’s Order No.8 labeled as the Bangladesh Collaborators Act of 1972. The act was designed to put under trial and punish those who in 1971 opposed his party’s move to dismember Pakistan.

The notorious P.O. 8
Obviously Khawja Khairuddin being a dedicated worker and leader of the Muslim League and staunch believer in the one Pakistan cause and the renowned person of the Dhaka Nawab Family who had his due role in upholding peace in Dhaka and East Pakistan in 1971 that was construed as opposition to the Mujib’s party’s Bangladesh movement, and so was arrested and put behind the bar soon after Dhaka fell to the invading Indian army in December 1971. The Collaborators Act was designed to punish such and all others in the opposite camp. Mahmud Ali, however, being a staunch supporter of one and united Pakistan evaded arrest for he then stayed in West Pakistan; his family somehow joined him latter never to return to his native place in Sunamganj, Syhet, Bangladesh.

Khawja and thousands put behind the bar
Khawja Khairuddin like thousands who opposed openly secession of East Pakistan, and even some who took up arms for the defense against Indian armed intervention but survived in life after 16th December had also been put under detention and kept so without trial for years even under the Collaborators Act. In late 1973 many were pardoned for their ‘offence’ of 1971. Khawja Saheb was put to trial in a lower court in 1973. In the hearing, he started by himself a defense statement wherein he started by narrating that he himself inherited from a Muslim Leaguer family that the Muslim League created Pakistan, it was his sacred duty to uphold the unity and integrity of Pakistan and so doing he committed nothing wrong but did the right thing clear in his conscience in 1971 for preservation of Pakistan. He was continuing the statement, but the judge asked him to stop and adjourned the court not only for the day but forever. Immediately afterwards Khawja Saheb was released from the prison without any further charge against him. On the day he was released from the Dhaka central prison, witnesses said that his motorcade took nearly four hours for him to reach his residence only about a mile away for people in lakhs filled the streets to greet him.

Khawja became Mujib’s special envoy to Pakistan (West)
The story of the great Khawja did not end there. Mujib, the P.M. of Bangladesh, in his effort in renewal of the old friendship issued for him a special Bangladeshi passport of the VIP genre and requested him to represent him and Bangladesh to Bhutto for special mending of relations with Pakistan. He could, however, do little as he settled in Karachi rather than coming back to Dhaka, and also that soon Mujib had his end in August 1975.

I met Khawja Saheb in London
I met Khaja Saheb in London in early 1980s when he visited London a number of times for treatment from Karachi and also in Dhaka in 1990s and got to know many interesting things he had with Mujib in earlier days in 1950s and 1960s. That Khawja Saheb had Awami League’s Nawabpur Road office arrear rents paid a number of times. That Mujib being tired of Bengali food used to dash at his home for Morag Pilao, Biriani, Gosh Partha, etc. on occasions but not at daytime but late at night.

I met Mahmud Ali also in London
Mahmud Ali almost all along had been a left leaning politician with outlook of Muslim nationhood of Pakistan. In the East Pakistan Cabinet of 1954 United Front Ministry he hold the portfolio of Revenue Ministry for some time. He edited monthly Nao Belal from Sylhet in late 1940s and early 1950s that propagated views of Islamic equity and social justice for all. He opposed Martial Law and dictatorship and stood for democracy. I had opportunities to know him personally very closely during the period of two decades from 1986 (London) to 2006 (He expired while delivering his speech in a public meeting in Lahore on the Kashmir issue on the 17th November 2006 at the age of 87). We had our contact first through his monthly, The Concept, published from Islamabad wherein I used to contribute first from London beginning in 1986 and then from Dhaka after 1989. I had occasions to meet him intimately a number of times in Islamabad and also in Multan and Lahore on the occasion of some seminars. He used to be highly respected as a guardian not only of over 1.5 million Bengalis who stayed back in Pakistan after 1971 but also of many hapless of other groups, and worked relentlessly for his belief in the organization he founded in early 1980s, Tehrik E Takmil E Pakistan, or the movement for fulfillment of Pakistan.

Alleged war criminals
To my knowledge, both these dead alleged ‘war criminals’ had been persons of clean character so far as human relations were concerned and as such there could have been nothing rash like specific war crime they could be indicted at personal level. I am sure there could be no specific violation of human rights as the war crimes meant to be by them, albeit, could be indicted for their alleged offense, if that could be established as offence all, that they opposed secession or what other termed as the 1971 independence war of Bangladesh.

Contrary to human rights
Any such allegation is bound to fell flat, because, difference in belief in terms of ideology is one’s inherent fundamental right guaranteed both by the UN Declaration of Human Rights and even by any democratic constitution of any civilized country. Besides, no country called Bangladesh, much less any constitution of the country existed anywhere in 1971 except in some rhetoric in air. Neither Bangladesh had any recognition as any independent country in 1971; even the best benefactor India did not recognize Bangladesh until the 6th December 1971 just only to legitimize the war of aggression. Thus Bangladesh as of 1971 can have no scope to try any alleged criminal for even any of tangible indictable acts of 1971.

Retrospective effect of law unsustainable
Based on the above line of argument, one must not miss the fact that legal jurisprudence does not provide for cognizance for trial of any offence in retrospective effect. The Bangladesh Government had no legitimate existence in 1971; it had partial legitimacy after the 16th December 1971 and full legitimacy secured not until Pakistan recognized it in February 1974. How could the illegitimate government put to trial any body for any crime if there had been any crime committed in 1971? If they do, it is bound to be illegitimate dispensation challengeable in higher court in the country, apart from scope for bringing such matter into the International Court of Justice.

Rogues on both sides
In 1971 rogues from both sides jumped on the other. If real justice is to done, both genres of the rogues must be brought to justice and not of one side alone. On this score Mujib as well need be indicted for he incited one group of the people to jump on the other. The massive killing of the non-Bengali population taken for certain as the supporter of united Pakistan not only during 1971 but even after should not be forgotten and also among the Bengali speaking thousands who remained always committed for united Pakistan and opposed the Awami league and India. Let not any person of clear conscience overlook the fact that the Bengal Muslims, in particular, overwhelmingly voted for one Pakistan in the general and crucially decisive election for Pakistan in 1946. The 1970 election result did not nullify the 1946 referendum that had been obtained on all India basis of the Muslims under the banner of the All India Muslim League. The Awami League did not even in a single utterance spoke anything clearly to the people that they would go for dismemberment of Pakistan, and I am sure if they did, people would not vote for them overwhelmingly in the 1970 election. The leader Mujib time and again decried all those who scented any bit of secession. Even during his captivity in West Pakistan, he offered to speak on the Pakistan media against Indian aggression of Pakistan in the 1971 December war (See, Mujib’s Chief Legal Counsel, A.K. Brohi’s last wishes published in the London based fortnightly Impact International, 28 September 1987, p.19).

Witch hunting
These evidences should suffice to establish the fact that should the question of war crime of 1971 be brought in cognizance, that must be for both sides and not of one side. One side trial would not only be immoral but also would merely be unjust witch hunting of the political opponents to please the masters of the government outside the national frontier.

Credibility at stake
I am afraid the court concerned by bringing in the case to declare the 23 alive and 13 dead persons for trial in the alleged war crime charge has put it to a test of fidelity only to make it discredited possibly not unlike as it happened in the hearing of the case of Khawja Khairuddin in Dhaka court in 1973.

Political and diplomatic cost
Apart from the legal cost of credibility, political and diplomatic cost would be huge that Bangladesh may find difficult to sustain, even if the big neighbor continues to shower all blessings for viability of the present government in Dhaka.

Author: M.T. Hussain