Untold Facts

Message about Col Farook on the 16 February Poster in Boimela

‘AMI PAP KORINI TAI TAOBA PORINI. KARON, AMI HOTYAR NIRDESH DEINI- CORNEL FAROOK’. That was in Bengali verbatim a poster reported to be on display on the back of a girl moving on the 16 February in the book fair as reported in a Dhaka daily on the 17th February that meant that Col Farook did not utter penance for he did not do any sin because he did nor order to kill anyone. The details of the news had other aspects that certainly made the news authentic. There were other published statements of Col Farook earlier made after August 1975 army coup, in 1980s to mid 1990s and published in many places that also reconfirmed that what the poster read was very much correct. It was not Farook alone but his other colleagues involved in the coup maintained the same bold stance as one had refused even to make Mercy petition to the President when he was pressurized to do so! They preferred martyrdom for the just cause they hold on to and did not budge at all. A highly learned Mufti termed Hasina in the matter of shear vengeance as the notorious Yazid and so impliedly the five martyrs as the Shahid E Karbala.

The summary or gist of outline what had been published about the matter in various media spanning over two decades was as below.

Col Farook had planned and organized the historic 15th August coup d’etat of 1975. But everything did not go at the critical minutes as he had planned and wished to do. The coup makers, according to plan, surrounded the President’s residence at Dhanmondi in the early hours of the 15th August. Some went upstairs to request the President to abdicate from the State power. He refused, instead asked the Army Chief Safiullah to come to his rescue who evaded and advised the President to flee through the backdoor of the house. For some time altercations went on. Suddenly from inside the house machine gun bullets were fired on the troops who kept the house surrounded. Some fell on to the bullets from inside. That broke the command and went beyond control; the troops went berserk without caring for any command. That was how killings on both sides took place in minutes. There was as such no scope either for control or for order by anybody to kill anyone in the incident. The poster had the gist in regard to no order to kill anyone. In midst of break of discipline though the coup did not fail but succeeded.

Fortunately for the people of Bangladesh, the coup being a victorious one and the new government sworn in having had allegiance from all organs and people’s jubilant nod, the nation was relieved from the autocratic and oppressively malevolent dictator. But misfortune took on Farook and some of his other junior colleagues after 21 years as scapegoats while the big fishes like the Army Chief Safiullah, etc. escaped the net for they sided with the boss, and ultimately the pawns to the gallows after 35 years on the 27-28 January 2010.

It is now well on record that the five executed to death until their last moments had stayed unnerved and firm on the stance that they did not do any wrong as the poster as well read. In the trial instituted after 21 years grossly violating the Indemnity, the wrong trial in civilian court, not in military court as the accused had been in military service during the occurrence and above all collusive executive engagement and interference in the whole trial process from the beginning to the end, the accused had been victims of miscarriage and mockery of justice. That they had no fair trial was echoed almost everywhere by humanitarian bodies like the Amnesty International, European Union, etc. and civilized countries. That the trial was by all norms was Political Trial remained a fact (The Economist, 27 November, 2009).

The hanging of the five coup leaders are not going to stop talking about it, much less its continuing political implications in Bangladesh in future. The poster whatsoever its significance and weight could be, it would reverberate inside the country and outside for the fruits both sweet and bitter and must stay in the minds and psyche of the people. And also that the 15th August 1975 and the 27-28 January 2010 would both remain obviously historic. Despite some hype of propaganda by a section here inside and Kolkata, Col Farook would not be lost as the hero in history, nor his colleagues either in the great act who all remained committed to the cause of freedom in true sense, multi-party democracy in pluralism, Islamic humane values as against inhuman and oppressive sham socialism, secularism and caste ridden Brahmanism.

Author: B K Din

Rule of Law of the Wrong Headed Egoist Vengeful Hasina!

It’s amazing to listen to Sheikh Hasina’s sermon to uphold rule of law. Well, she must mean so if the relevant verdict of law court would be to her liking and favor and not otherwise.
Who the sensible soul is who may believe the notorious liar, egoist, wrong headed and blood thirsty Sheikh Hasina making her stance for rule of law? None would do but only the gullible sycophants.

First, can Hasina make public the figure for rule of law, possibly billions of Taka, in money term her cadres of all genres illegally earned flouting normal laws openly at the cost of public expense during the last 1 year and one month through rent seeking, tender snatching, underhand dealings selling favors to helpless clients at home and collusive partners abroad?
Second, how about the corruption and illegal money earning cases that stood against almost all his party men by now all withdrawn in the period she stayed in top of the government? How about the 13 cases she had against herself but all gone off the list without even any nominal inquiry?

Third, is the rule of law working at all in massive Awami politicization of the administration?
Fourth, is it rule of law huddling 17,000 opposition political activists like beasts in about a week?
Fifth, is that rule of law that the Awami League party cadres and loyalists going scot-free doing even murders in open like they did kill Abu Baker, a brilliant student of DU the other day?
There was a substantive strong rumor in the famous case verdict of the 27th January. The specific junior judge who would have never got the position of the Chief Justice in normal case and would retire in the position lower than the top position by the February 7 (10) was made the Chief justice by Hasina in collusive understanding for making a specific final Review verdict in the specific case. He kept the promise for the undue favor he had received that made Hasina, her cadres and few in Kolkata jubilant. That the final verdict made a mockery of justice was privately commented on by many senior jurists in the country. At the international level the veracity was seriously questioned and labeled that very rightly as the POLITICAL TRIAL OF HASINA (The Economist, 27 November 2009). The rush for executing of the five noted and decorated freedom fighters and former brilliant army officers in the made up case in hours, despite repeated genuine appeals made by many reputed humanitarian organizations like the Amnesty International, the European Union etc., proved beyond doubt that the case and the verdict remained seriously flawed but only to satisfy Hasina’s personal vengeance for further reason that the 5 convicts had been in lower down the serial of death convicts not less than 1020 including 36 women in the 67 prisons of Bangladesh.

It is, however, not correct to state that the case since the very inception and start had not had the sort of collusive engagement of Hasina started in mid 1996, her 1st term of P.M. She had the only goal as she herself frankly admitted to take to politics in 1981 (See BBC fame Serajur Rahman, Daily Nayadiganta 24 March 2009) that she hated politics but only to avenge the blood of her father she entered in the politics of Bangladesh. All through the period the judges during her rule then and this time most loyally followed her dictate so much so that the term she used as KHUNI or murderer had been adhered to by the judges except the few that did permit leave to appeal in 2007. In international legal norms and usages they were not murderers but successful mutineers having had inherent indemnity in addition to immunity granted by the post 15th August 1975 coup government on the 26th August 1975. The 27th January verdict flouted all the immunities and the immediate execution in unusual hurry on the following night of five to death as scapegoats leaving the big shots like the coup period Army Chief General Safiullah etc out of even indictment for they lined up with Hasina in the party thus now has rightly been documented in historical records not only as the clear miscarriage of justice and judicial murder but also in gross breach of rule of law that fell far short of fair, neutral and free from interference. .

Author: B K Din

Yazid Hasina Re-enacted Karbala

A confirmed report published in a Dhaka daily on the 16th February quoted a senior MUFTI (Islamic scholar) labeling Sheikh Hasina as the Yazid of Bangladesh. Earlier in 1975 just following the 15th August glorious army coup in Dhaka, the then Speaker of the Bangladesh Parliament and the Awami League acting President Abdul Malek Ukil termed Hasina’s fallen father from power as the notorious Faraoh of Egypt drowned with all his courtiers in the great river Nile in pre historic days in Egypt while he had been pursuing Prophet Moses (RU) to kill.
Faraoh had been the most oppressive ruler of Egypt, cared nothing for the people much less for their spiritual aspirations. Hasina’s father replicated very appropriately the most notorious Faraoh and the end in drowning just as Malek Ukil who knew the Bangladesh Faraoh best from close quarters in the party.

Rightly toppling Faraoh in 1975, the historic Muslim Bangladesh began to reassert herself as the proud Muslim nation. But the assertion was not that easy. The MUNAFIQUES or hypocrites from inside and the clever Kautilyas-Chanakyas from outside continued to annihilate for liquidation of Muslim Bangladesh.

The grand collusion of the hypocrites and the Kautilyas-Chanakyas had the big success on the 27-28 January (2010) night in Dhaka that replicated the Karbala, hypocrite Yazid won against Imam Husain (RA). One may recall the painful and shameful historical truth that the Karbala episode put the last nail into the coffin of the pro-people Caliphate for the dynastic anti people rule afterwards.

The defeat and win of one against the other did not remain limited alone to personalities. It went far for enchainment of the 150 million Muslims of the land encaged by the Kautilyas-Chanakyas from almost all sides around. The lackeys inside appear happy with Mess of Pottage to lick the boots of the Kautilyas-Chanakyas.

Hasina’s father exploiting the sentiment of simple millions ventured to establish his absolutely autocratic dynastic rule that he pursued for three and half years through all forms of conceivable oppression and repression of the common people. Fortunately a few heroic and courageous sons of the soil with the spirit of the Muslims took all risks to ditch the Faraoh of Bangladesh and they did that victoriously. The people enjoyed fortunately the fruits of the historic victory for three and a half decades that ended at the Karbala re-enacted by Yazid Hasina on the 27-28 January midnight.

The Kautilyas -Chanakyas have obviously sided with the Yazid of Bangladesh for reestablishing the anti-people and autocratic dynastic rule that the Faraoh in early 1970s had tried but failed on the 15th August 1975. Now it’s an open challenge that the Muslims have to deeply appreciate and look for the right way out for real liberation in the immediate future.

There is nothing to take for granted that the Yazid would live until the last day of KEAMAT, but whatever period she keeps on hold, the Muslims have no future in any aspect of their lives, much less freedom, liberty, dignity, social justice and spirituality.
The Mufti was forthright and courageous and not like many hypocrites who appreciated privately the drama of mockery of justice finally acted on the black night but remained silent for understandably fear of personal difficulties and of life threatening reprisal.

Author: B K Din

KHUNI: Walk Out! Offence is the Best Defense

The first day the BNP re-entered the Parliament to join after about a year and to participate, they made a walk out in protest of the treasury bench member and a minister calling President Zia bad names as KHUNI. On the second day on the 14th February similar drama was enacted and the BNP made the second time walk out. Well, that was a matter not only of BNP’s dignity and prestige but also of their viability and existence and so they did act and walked out of the House for some time in protest to assert their dissent and position.

That was BNP’s, I would say, soft protest in parliamentary mode that they lodged. I have got, however, other idea for action program in my thought.

My point is who that politician in Bangladesh who is an angel. Was the Awami League’s ‘father’ an angel? Not, at all. His hand was more blood stained than possibly any other in recent history. Why should BNP feel shy about counter attacking the AL about their father’s record of bloodletting in the country?

The so-called ‘father’, a charity boy turned muscleman of Sohrawardy in the early 1940s in Calcutta happened to be a nominally paid “GOONDA” for all sorts of anti-social activities so long as they fitted in the politics of the period. Not that he was alone, but had other companions too. One such mate was known to me later in Dhaka. He was a businessman, expired about 15 years ago, he told me many stories of their co-activities of musclemen in Calcutta and also in post 1947 Dhaka. Though they maintained a personal relationship but distanced in political party affiliation and outlook that divided them further in 1971.

In post 1971 Bangladesh when the ‘father’ rose to his peak in political and state power, the other friend caught trapped under the Collaborators Act of 1972, and so went on hiding to escape arrest. One day in early 1972, he managed the security of the Dhanmondi residence of the ‘father’ and dashed to his bedroom in the upstairs, albeit, having had nod from the master. The first question the ‘father’ posed to him, ‘how many have you killed’? The other friend replied, ‘let me have first withdrawal of the warrant of arrest against me, we may talk other things afterwards’. The leader rightly did sign on the warrant of arrest document canceling the order without any further word. The fact remained that he was never arrested in his life time as a ‘collaborator’. One can make one’s own conclusion as to either broadness of the leader or of fear of their collusive black side of past records. I recalled this incident here not to say anything specific of murdering any man by them but only to indicate that as political workers and leader they were not clean of others blood in hand.

If we recall from our experience as doing I am, a class one job holding person in 1971 and staying in Dhaka with eyes open along with ears and mind smartly alert, I failed to forget that how the leader in his top of popularity and control unleashed his gullible cadres in hundreds and thousands to annihilate, torture, put houses in arson and kill the opponents. I recall clearly that his incitement led to unaccounted killing of the very poor men and women in shanties of Dhaka who had left their homes and properties in India and migrated to East Pakistan in1947. The incitement language in verbatim was, I remember, “EBAR MARAMARI HOBE MUSALMAN MUSALMANE”-this time Muslims will fight Muslims. The result was well known. Annihilation, arson, killing mainly of those hapless people started on the 1st March 1971, 25 days before the army crack down, not only in Dhaka but also elsewhere almost everywhere where the immigrant had their concentration. Mass killings in those places did not stop until the federal army retook control after 25 March 1971 and in some localities not until mid May 1971.

The bloodletting in 1971 is attributed no doubt to Yaha’s murderous army operation but the ‘father’ as well can hardly escape responsibility of all murderous operations beginning from the 1st March onwards.

One member of the Governor Malek ministry of 1971 told me later on that the cleaning of ‘miscreants’ by the army had the tacit nod of the ‘father’. God knows the real truth.

As a follow up, we saw all forms of torture, annihilation, kidnapping and extra-judicial killings in thousands in post 1971 independent Bangladesh perpetrated by the Indian secret service R&AW organized and managed force just like Hitlar’s Gestapo here euphemistically known as the Jatiya Rakhsmi Bahini (JRB). The force had no constitutional sanction and yet organized and armed better than the national army of the country. As the records are this force since early 1972 tortured each day in and out unaccounted men and women imagined to be the foes of the ‘father’. During the one man absolute rule of the ‘father’ notorious Bahini had killed according to estimates made between 32-40,000 mainly youths. He had his open order in Bengali verbatim to police, “NAKSHAL DEKHLE GULI KORO”- shoot at the sight of the Naxals- Maoists… He had, in addition, other private hoodlum forces for torture, kidnapping and killing of imaginary opponents; the main ones were led by his son Sheikh Kamal, nephew Sheikh Moni and specially favored SP of Dhaka Mahboob. In addition, he used to send special police force to capture and kill whoever the ‘father’ would have asked for. One such noted instance was the killing in detention of the brilliant Engineer and left party leader Seraj Sukder, Chief of the Sarbahara Party. Immediately after his killing in police custody, the ‘father’ rose to his feet and spoke in the floor of the house on January 2, 1975 and boasted in Bengali verbatim, “KOTHAE AJ SERAJ SIKDER”- where Seraj Sikder is today! Was that not his admission as the killer of Sikder? Was not the ‘father’ a big KHUNI? Had he not been finished on the 15th August, 1975 how many more, in addition to 40,000 or so, he would have killed with all impunity?

These are some of the instances of the ‘big’ deeds of the ‘father’ on clear record. Why can’t then the BNP cite these instances and use the term KHUNI against the ‘father’? Or else they have to hear the same bad name against Zia and make walk outs again and again, possibly having no remedy whatsoever.

Incidentally, the AL has got a certificate on the 27th January 2010 to use the term for that they have had managed already to execute as KHUNI or killer in the same charge five of Zia’s army colleagues in unprecedented haste while it is known that not less than 1020 prisoners condemned to death sentence are there in the waiting list for execution in the prison for much longer time. And further that the episode was nothing but the worst form of judicial murder in recent history, if not the real murder in thirst for blood for deep vengeance of Hasina through mockery of justice.

The BNP must have more courage to tell the House that who is the real KHUNI of those 57 army officers and 16 others killed in the unprecedented BDR massacre of February 25-26, 2009. Why is the cover up and hush up by the Hasina Government to save the behind the scene KHUNIs? Is she clean at all?

Offence should be the best defense for the BNP. Is not it?

Author: B K Din

Indo-Pak parleys

Probably it is due to Gen Kayani’s recent candid assertion to the NATO commanders that his prime concern was defence of Pakistan’s eastern borders (against India) rather than fighting the war on terror on the western front that has prompted the international community in pressurising India to resume talks with Pakistan. Pakistan must, therefore, view the Indian offer in its correct perspective and not fall prey to it. We certainly want better relations with India but not at the cost of Kashmir and water. India would try to talk as usual all about the sun and the moon but not on Kashmir and water, exasperating and frustrating Pakistan to the extent of quitting the talks.

No one among today’s politicians is shrewder than Z A Bhutto in diplomacy. But even he could not make Swaran Singh utter a single word on Kashmir in his 22-day-long parleys in Murree in May/June 1965. At the end of the unsuccessful marathon Swaran Singh triumphantly confided to the pressmen that his sole aim was to gain time which he had done. So did Shastri to Ayub Khan at Tashkent, and made him walk away from the talks just out of frustration as Shastri wouldn’t talk about Kashmir. Kosygin, sensing the abrupt deadlock, asked Ayub if he was a chess player. Ayub, sort of nonplussed by such a question, said: “No, why?” “Because it is his (Shastri’s) move and that you must sit at the table till he moved”, was Kosygin’s cool reply. Ayub resumed his seat but was mercifully relieved when Shastri left to meet his Maker.

Gandhi kept on talking for hours on end on cabbage to a bewildered Mountbatten, who had invited him for the first time for a serious discussion on the future of India. Indians are past masters in the art of frustrating others during parleys and talks, and we must, therefore, make it quite clear to them that we want to talk, but about Kashmir and water.

Author: Col (r) Riaz Jafri
From, Rawalpindi, Pakistan

Commentary : Abuse of police power won’t help: VCs should take responsibility

As the combing operation launched by the government to haul up Shibir and Jamaat activists from all over the country continues in a bid, what the administration said, to catch those responsible for the killing of Bangladesh Chhatra League activist Farukh on the Rajshahi University campus, the Vice-Chancellor of Rajshahi University on Saturday blamed the police for neglect of duty in preventing the killing.

RU Vice-Chancellor Sobhan told a press conference in a written statement that the blame for the violence squarely fell on Police. “Prior to the clash on February 8, the police commissioner came to visit me after inspecting the campus. He was informed of possible trouble as some suspicious characters were seen gathering in areas adjoining the university. He was also told to take preventive actions,” Sobhan said.

He said the police commissioner, before leaving, assured the authorities that enough force would be deployed on the campus and that the situation was under control. “It is very strange that the violent clashes that night continued for about an hour despite the so-called precautions taken by the police,” the statement said.

While the murder of the BCL activist has been condemned by all concerned, the countrywide combing operation launched against Shibir and Jamaat activists in response has raised eye-brows because such tough action did neither follow the recent killing of a student even on the Dhaka University campus, nor the clash in which Jatiyatabadi Chhatra Dal activist Tuku was grievously injured in the same university premises.

Before these incidents a number of BCL workers were killed in internecine intra-party clashes for establishment of supremacy on different educational institutions including the Dhaka Medical College Hospital.

Leaders of BNP on Saturday sharply criticised the government for its contradictory role following the recent campus killings. They said the government was harassing the opposition leaders and activists in the name of ‘combing operation’ for the killing of BCL worker Faruk but it surprisingly remained silent about the killing of Abu Bakar, a student of Dhaka University.

A senior teacher of Dhaka University has remarked that under the present democratic set-up the government cannot launch such a country-wide operation against a party which has been legally registered with the Election Commission and has two elected MPs in Parliament.

The average citizens would have felt assured if they could see a professional approach on the part of the police to haul up those responsible for the RU killing. Instead the countrywide operation that has so far been carried out interning more than 500 Shibir and Jamaat activists has created panic in the public mind.

The action has also harmed whatever neutral image the law enforcing agencies had in professionally dealing with people responsible for crimes. It carries the danger of not upholding or ignoring the democratic freedoms of all sections of the society.

We know police are in no position to act independently. What we can say is that abuse of police power in dealing with campus violence is bound to prove counter-productive. The VCs must come forward and take responsibility. Instead of hiding behind government’s police, the VCs should raise campus police and take responsibility of protecting their students.

Source: the New Nation

Opinion: Between the 4th and 5th Amendments

In the euphoria over the Supreme Court’s invalidation of the Fifth Amendment, giddy observers and assorted sycophants conveniently forget that the spirit of the 1972 Constitution was changed by the Fourth Amendment of 1975 as much as, if not more so, by the now infamous Fifth. In fact, even as I write there are constitutional experts huddled together wondering if this week’s judicial verdict takes us back to the regime of the Fourth Amendment.

And what was the Fourth Amendment that was written, championed, and passed by the very individuals who today claim the restoration of democracy?

By virtue of the Fourth Amendment, with the stroke of a pen Bangladesh went from a multi-party parliamentary democracy to a one party presidential dictatorship. It banned all parties, association and newspapers not controlled by the state, made the Supreme judiciary subservient to the President, and made it mandatory for all public servants to become members of the ruling party. There are dozens of members in today’s parliament and government who voted for this democracy killing monstrosity in 1975 with the enthusiasm of schoolboys on summer vacation.

Where, I ask, was the love of the 1972 Constitution then? Where was the beautiful prose of fundamental rights? Where was the burning desire to establish democracy?

It was not there then and it is not there now. Given how the world has changed and even the erstwhile one party states have devolved into thriving representative democracies, the champions of the Fourth Amendment dare not openly display their contempt for dissent. Close observation, however, makes plain that even in 2010, in their third run at state power, these people are very uncomfortable with any dissent.

Only the other day, the goons of the ruling party beat up coeds peacefully holding a rally at Dhaka University grounds. A subservient police, reminiscent of Rakhi Bahini days, watched on the sidelines and then put the victims of the atrocity in prison! All this was captured by camera and splashed around the national dailies and the world. And this is on top of the five judicial murders and the two dozen extra judicial ones that have already happened on the watch of this government.

No wonder the present rulers are smiling at the demise of the Fifth Amendment: is that because the verdict takes them one step closer to their cherished fiefdom of the times of the Fourth Amendment when a monolithic elite ruled with absolute power?

Only time can tell.

Author: Esam Sohail
(The author is a former college lecturer of international affairs and writes from Kansas, USA)
Source; The New Nation

Would Bangladesh gain from the Obama visit

Presence of President Obama’s highest-ranking official Judith A McHale, US Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs in Dhaka on February 6-8 following Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of State in the Bureau of South and Central Asian Affairs Patrick S. Moon’s visit in last January, shows his acute interests in Bangladesh.

And it is heartening to learn through a recent press report that he may visit Bangladesh sometime towards the end of this year or early next year while he will be on a trip to Afghanistan, Pakistan, and India.

So far no dates have been nailed down yet, but US Defense Secretary Robert Gates’s recent visit to New Delhi, Islamabad, and Kabul in last January, boost the potential visit of President Obama to South Asia during the two years of his presidency.

Twenty two years after President Carter’s visit, President Bill Clinton visited India in March 2000, in the last year of his second term. His successor President George W Bush made it to New Delhi in 2006, more than two years into his second term. While President George W Bush cancelled a planned visit to Bangladesh, Bill Clinton had visited the nation on a one-day trip in March 2000 during Sheikh Hasina’s last rule.

While appreciating Bangladesh for its immense contributions to the UN Peace Keeping Operations (UNPKOs) saying the country has enhanced and glorified its image and prestige along with the United Nations by contributing its troops to the UNPKOs aiming at restoration of peace in different conflict-ridden countries, Obama accepted an invitation by Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina to visit Bangladesh at a working dinner in New York on September 23, 2009. If the US President’s expected visit to Bangladesh will take place into reality, Bangladesh would be more benefitted from Obama’s policies and initiatives.

Democratic elections in 1991 ended two decades of authoritarian rule in Dhaka. But political violence has become part of the political landscape in Bangladesh. While economic progress has been made, it has always been impaired by rivalry between the two largest political parties. At the political juncture in Bangladesh during the last caretaker government, millions of people in the country had been inspired by President Obama while he won the election on November 4, 2008. Everyone got goose bumps all over again listening to his speech.

“Our time of standing pat, of protecting narrow interests and putting off unpleasant decisions-that time has surely passed.” As people of Bangladesh had repeated experience of corruption in politics or volatile political practices, they were delighted while he said, “To those who cling to power through corruption and deceit and the silencing of dissent, know that you are on the wrong side of history.” Again people had been inspired by his first State of the Union Address on Wednesday, January 20, 2010 while he said that the Americans who lend hands to their neighbors and give back to their country, aren’t Republican or Democrat, they are Americans.

While concentrated wealth, fear of terrorism, theocracy, corruption in government and politics, arrogant and ignorant executives, and violation of civil liberties and human rights always put the country in many difficulties, Obama’s political agendas are well respected in Bangladesh where political sovereignty is retained by the people.

On the other hand, the United States has long-standing close relations with Bangladesh and has viewed Bangladesh as a moderate voice in the Islamic world. Major U.S. interests in Bangladesh include political stability and democratization; continuation of economic reform and market-opening policies; social and economic development; environmental issues; counterterrorism; and improvement of the human rights situation. Bangladesh’s status as a secular and moderate state, as well as its democratic process, has been jeopardized repeatedly as a result of the approach taken by the two main political parties.

Formerly known as East Pakistan, and before that as the East Bengal region of British India, Bangladesh gained its independence from Pakistan following Liberation war in December 1971.

Though Bangladesh is strategically important for South Asia, but US interest in Bangladesh is not strategic. Bangladesh since its inception has forged a relationship of friendship and cooperation with China.

It is Washington’s interest not to allow Bangladesh so close to the Indian Ocean, where US has vital strategic interests, to be totally under either the Soviet sphere of influence of that of China. In recent development, it has been a tumultuous for US-China relations, as disputes over arms sells to Taiwan, the future visit of the Dali Lama to the US, and trade and currency accusations between the two nations are led to tense talk between the two nations. Washington wants a stable Bangladesh and any power vacuum in Bangladesh created by political and economic chaos resulting in upsetting the status quo is not in its interest.

Islam has served as a legitimizing political force in Bangladesh. The roughly even split in support for the Awami League (the present ruling party) and the Bangladesh Nationalist Party has given small Islamist parties, some of which have ties to violent Islamist radicals throughout the world, a disproportionate voice in Bangladesh’s government and politics in recent years. Islamists support the imposition of Sharia law in Bangladesh.

Accepting Credentials of newly appointed Bangladesh Ambassador to the United States Akramul Qader on November 4, 2009, President Obama referred his Cairo speech and reiterated his desire to see a Muslim majority Bangladesh where economy is “robust”, educational opportunities are in “abundance”, international investments are in “plenty”, and human rights are not compromised with “anything.” A Washington deep concern lies not to see Bangladesh with increased influence by Islamist extremists.

Bangladesh is a recipient of significant international aid. It has received more than $30 billion from foreign donors since its independence in 1971.

The State Department has requested a total of $88,790,000 in assistance for Bangladesh in the FY2008 budget request. U.S. is Bangladesh’s No.1 customer and is the most important trading partner.

The total bilateral trade in 2007 between Bangladesh and the United States was $ 4.3 billion of which 3.6 billion was exports from Bangladesh to the US and 0.6 billion was imports from the USA. US also happens to be the 2nd largest source of remittance to Bangladesh—total remittance inflow was 1.4 billion dollars in 2007/08. But Bangladesh is not a TIFA (Trade and Investment Agreement Framework) partner of US by which two nations can discuss economic issues of mutual interest.

Still Bangladesh is fighting with duty free access to the U.S. for ready-made garments as the average duty rate on Bangladeshi exports to the USA is more than 15%, compared with the average duty rate of 0.3% for the exports from the EU 27 countries. Another important issues among President Obama’s trade policies; “that is workers’ rights” can be followed in Bangladesh.

Bangladesh is seriously vulnerable to the effects of global climate change. While President Obama personally assured Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina that the U.S. government would stand beside Bangladesh in its battle against the crucial climate change during the last Copenhagen climate change summit, the Obama administration has approved in principle the Hasina government’s initiative for a South Asian forum against terrorism and Dhaka’s bid to hold trial of “war criminals” who killed unarmed civilians during its freedom movement in 1971.

According to the New York Times, whether in Bangladesh or Queens in New York, Yunus is widely recognized wherever he goes.

While according to Forbes magazine, DR, Muhammad Yunus, the Nobel laureate for peace in 2006 and the recipient of the Presidential Medal of Freedom of US, stands no. 6 among the 10 Most Influential Business Gurus in the world in 2009, Bangladesh government still couldn’t able to make him an “Ambassador of goodwill” for the greater benefit of the country. President Obama is personally monitoring how relations stand between the Prof. Muhammed Yunus and the government of Sheikh Hasina.

Bangladesh pursues a moderate foreign policy that places heavy reliance on multinational diplomacy. The United States and Bangladesh have been friends for more than half a century. Government of Bangladesh should expedite diplomatic move involving Dr. Muhammed Yunus to make into reality of the potential tour of President Barack H. Obama to Bangladesh.

Author: Ripan kumar Biswas
Source: The New Nation

Observation: Martyrs of January 27-28 keep on Inspiring

They kept up the basic spirit of their great and noble task they victoriously undertook on the 15th August 1975 early morning in Dhaka even with courage in the trying and last moments of their lives. “I have not done any wrong”, “I have done what I thought right for the good of the country” were the kind of their .bold and heroic sounds from their mouths and lips and then kept on reciting the KALIMA in embracing the noose in the early hours of the 28th January (10) in the Dhaka prison. They had broken but did not budge in their pious commitment and sure onward journey to the heaven.
No doubt that some frenzied of the particular genre and their cohorts in Kolkata celebrated the heinous event, but the patriots and sensible souls inside the country and almost all over the world deeply lamented the Judicial Murder of the Kangaroo Court. Whether Hasina’s settling scores of beastly vengeance was enough to her full satisfaction as she lamented for none had mourned on the 15th August 1975 remained uncertain.

Now in their abode in the JANNATUL FERDOUS, Farook, Shahreer, Huda and two Mohiuddins can pity on the unfortunate people of Bangladesh and at the same time take pride in so many issues they had settled through their heroic action programs of the brilliantly historic 15th August 1975.

1. They had ditched the most corrupt party government in mid August 1975.
2. They had freed the people from the malevolent and the meanest dictatorship.
3. They had killed the notorious lone party anti-democracy BKSAL in Bangladesh.
4. They had eliminated the unconstitutional and Indian secret service R&AW controlled killer Para military force or the RAKHSMI BAHINI.
5. They had saved the people from killing with impunity in the hands of the Rakhsmi Bahini.
6. They had stopped killing game by the ruling government of all imaginary political opponents from mid August 1975 that could have gone on adding to the numbers. of 40,000 plus during 1972- mid August 1975, had the FARAOH not been drowned in the Egyptian great river Nile.
7. Multi-party democracy and plural democracy was restored for the freedom loving people of Bangladesh.
8. Press freedom, essentially needed for multi-party democracy had also been freed.
9. Bangladesh’s image in the advanced free world, China and in Muslim countries had been restored and enhanced.
10. In all these above achievements the great martyrs continue to inspire the freedom loving people of Bangladesh.

Author: B K Din

Vengeance: No Rule of Law No Patriotism

Sheikh Hasina, now second term P.M. of Bangladesh, kept and lived up to her ego she frankly made in early 1980s for vengeance for her father’s blood, in Bengali verbatim PITRIHOTYAR PROTISHODHER JONYA RAJNITI KORCHI (See, BBC fame Serajur Rahman, Daily Nayadiganta, 24 March 2009). She had reasons for vengeance, not without good passionate ground. She lost her father and some close relations that gave birth to the deep ego of vengeance. She took the reprisal as she had opportunity to do so and with all might at her disposal of the sovereign power of Bangladesh.

The episode started on the 15th August 1975 and culminated in the historic hanging to death five accused in egoist vengeance on the night of 27-28 January 2010. It was a long journey of about 35 years for her to inflict the vengeance through capital punishment despised in all civilized countries ( 95 ), though not to all but to five scapegoats. The scapegoats had all been the patriots of the highest order.

As the records are, those executed only out of shear vengeance to death were not duffers (as her academic records are) or ‘wrong headed’ (as the country’s highest court certified her earlier) like Hasina herself.

The patriots and the brilliant sons of the country contributed lot for the country (See, weekly The Holiday, 5 February, 2010) until turned unfortunately ‘killers’ of her father and so got hanged to ‘uphold the rule of law’!. Was the game so plain, fair, neutral and simple or of Kangaroo Court?
First, were they actually killers of her father in the ordinary sense of the term in the colonial judiciary or Cr. P.C. of the past British rulers? Second, why there is not in force the capital punishment in Britain like in other 95 more civilized countries? Three, was the so called due process of law fair, neutral and free from Hasina’s direct interference? Direct collusive executive engagement and interference.

The due process was first blocked through making the mutiny an ordinary killing game of the deeply patriot heroes and successful army coup d’ etat men, in the session judge court in late 1996, a very well known handpicked one and then having had showers of favors. Though the session judge court worked for about two years before delivering its judgment in early November 1998, the defense lawyers had been constantly hoodwinked, intimidated, psychologically and socially harassed not only by the government agencies at various levels but also constantly by Hasina’s party hoodlums around the premises of the court and elsewhere. Over and above the legal Indemnity was illegally annulled, and that the jurisdiction of the civilian court to try army officer was fraudulently obtained by Hasina from her FUFA, illegally appointed by her as the Army Chief taken in from retirement! It was thus obviously the judge on the 8th November 1998 gave a verdict to ‘put to death fifteen of the accused by firing squad’, no where ‘firing squad’ provided in the civil penal code. That had proved that the verdict was given for appeasement of Hasina, the then absolutely powerful Prime Minister, pursuing the case all through and with all endless back ups at her wide command.

Then on as the case went to the High Court for death confirmation reference, due process faced the same odd fate for the same reason of collusive executive interference. In the mean time when Hasina failed in the election of October 2001 and a new government came into power, and the convicted by then reduced from 15 to 12 by the High Court, and the four of the accused in detention, others stayed outside the country as fugitive, petitioned the Supreme Court against their conviction. The petition was heard by a bench of the Supreme Court in 2007 and on five points allowed their leave to appeal. To note that at this time neither of the political government was in power of the country. The five points were substantive and had further possibility of BENEFIT OF DOUBT in each point that could have gone in favor of the accused out of at least the capital punishment.

Then on again Hasina took on to the all powerful P.M. in January 2009 and expedited the formation of new bench and further expedited the process to have final verdict. On the 19th November (09) the bench confirmed death of all 12. Except in the Hasina’s circle the verdict stunned the right thinking patriotic millions. Outside the country at international level, protest against the death sentence to 12 was voiced very loudly. The Amnesty International, very dignified and powerful organization promptly on the 20th November (09) sent their disapproval of the death sentence and made requests to the President and the Prime Minister at least to commute the death sentence of the 12. On the 24 November, the Bar Human Rights Committee of England and Wales made the same request and gave public statement. Other organizations also joined in the appeal and request. The Economist, internationally reputed weekly, exposed the non-validity of the verdict labeling that as the POLITICAL TRIAL OF HASINA, and not a judicial verdict at all neutral, fair and free from collusive executive interference. Other international bodies and organizations joined in the appeal against death sentence, the latest one was of very powerful wordings of the European Union made on the 23 January (2010) so much so that they seriously questioned the fairness, neutrality and non-interference in the due process of law (See also BBC fame Serajur Rahman, Daily Nayadiganta, 2 February, 2010).

In the meantime a junior judge superceding some was promoted as Chief Justice who heard the Review of the Appeal along with three others. He was to retire in superannuation within days on the 7th February and so he made a brief summary hearing and rejected the Review petition keeping up the 12 sentenced to death as before given on the 27th January. Skeptics had been saying- even men in streets- that he was made the Chief Justice just in collusive understanding that he would reject the Review petition in the way he did obviously for two immediate personal and private gains, the retirement benefit of Chief Justice that was not due for him for he had to otherwise retire in a lower rank. Thus in the deal he also had a good hallow from Hasina and her men in the party and the government that would give him many underhand perks as she gave to the Session Court judge in late 1990s and for another in the same case in the High Court in 2001. Any intelligent person could well make his/her opinion in this matter of fair, neutral and non-interference in the case for Hasina satisfying her ego of vengeance. Her egoist drive led to execute the five in prison in hours passed midnight 27 January in unusual speed and mode ( there are complaints of slaughtering by neck rather than hanging) caring nothing about the Mercy Petition to the President and giving damn to the international appeals not to execute them to death. Justice thus was clearly skewed in favor of egoist vengeance and not seen to be done by the apex court as well.

The executed five were all intelligent and valiant freedom fighters of 1971 having many credits in their bag for the country, but they got no sympathy whatsoever for the achievements. They did not wish to have any favor from anyone but remained steadfast in their last trying moments. Heroically they embraced the noose (slaughtering by knife (?)- complained by a family member while making wash up at their own place, police hushing up and hiding things, while putting up fresh Kafan- the complain further went that Hasina had arranged special brutal executioner for slitting throat of one specific accused she had deep vengeance to realize) for death reiterating very firmly that whatever they did was for the good of the country and did not do any wrong. They toppled very rightly the partisan, autocratic, undemocratic, corrupt and anti-people, killer (Rakhsmi Bahini mode) leader Mujib in 1975 August. Thus they all did the right job for any true patriot, not fake one like Hasina/Mujib, as are not very uncommon in many developing countries for dethroning of notorious government leaders through army coup d’ etat.

They have got no justice that may be termed fair, neutral or free from collusive executive interference but in reality miscarriage of justice leading obviously to the judicial murder. Hasina, however, failed not only in criteria of fairness and neutrality in the case but also in patriotism for she was all the time egoistically driven by her passion of deep vengeance. If 1971 position could be a yardstick of patriotism, Hasina and her mother enjoyed the best hospitality of the Pakistan army at their Dhanmondi residence and also at the Dhaka Cantonment Military Hospital where Hasina gave birth to her first son Joy in celebration of the attending Pakistani doctors and nurses there. Contrarily the executed five at that point of time valiantly fought against the Pakistan Army in the war and won credits.

Broadness of mind and forgiveness, particularly for Muslims and not egoistic vengeance are requirements of TAQWA or piety and so of patriotism in that she had failed very miserably.
As they until the last moment of their lives all stood firm and resolute in their beliefs and commitment for the people of the country and so gladly embraced martyrdom, the Almighty Allah, I am sure, has accepted their sacrifice as Islamic Shahid. Some are saying that the notorious ruler Yazid won on the 27-28 January night in Dhaka against Imam Hussain symbolically at Karbala.

The blood thirsty Hasina is known to bring back the other six accused back to Dhaka still staying as fugitives in other countries to finish up the passion of vengeance. Well, that’s quite likely. But what about those who have remained outside indictment and staying close to and around her even in high profile in the party?

Could the frenzied Awami guys and their cohorts in Kolkata who have been drumming up the execution make sensible reply to the few relevant questions?

Could they rationally have expected the multi-party democratic Parliament and Government since after the 15th August 1975, had there been no 15th August coup? How could the BKSAL dictatorship have been eliminated for multi-party open democracy? How could the killer Rakhsmi Bahini disbanded and their massive extra-judicial killings in thousands stopped? Could Bangladesh regain dignity in the free world and in Muslim countries except the effective 15th August coup and change? Could closeness with China be possible that shied away for over three years until the fall of Hasina’s father from State power?

Patriots make history of substance and dignity, not the lackeys, much less the duffers or inhuman egoists having no minimum care for rule of law that must be fair, neutral and free from interference. Provided Bangladesh survives in posterity as a free and independent country, history for these deeply patriot souls would be written differently and also for the egoist inhuman now masquerading as patriot but truly fake one absolutely subservient to the R&AW and Delhi. For the French warrior Joan of Arc it took 489 years (1431-1920) to get recertification from the previous appellation of ‘Witch’ to the ‘Saint’ (patriot) or for the Bengali Khudiram about 40 years ( 1908-48) or for the Punjabi Udham Singh only 12 years (1940-52) from the colonial appellation of ‘killer’ to recognition as great patriots in changed political situation.

The most inhuman ego of Hasina in the matter would only ditch her into the dustbin of history in not too distant future along with her father who as well played the notorious game in history, once ditched in 1975, somewhat resurrected in foul trading about the follies of some gullible people, but certain to be ditched forever in the next turn that comes up sooner than later. Her notorious vengeance will certainly be replaced by humane values, rule of law and patriotism in the hearts and minds hopefully of the next humane leaders and value laden future progeny.

Author: B K Din