Untold Facts

DAMN THE DIALOGUE

(There is palpable anger in Pakistan over the dams that India has built in Kashmir over the rivers whose water belongs to Pakistan under the Indus Basin Water Treaty. The headlines in Pakistani newspapers say, “Pakistan being made a desert by Indian Dams in Kashmir”. But India is too cocky to care. Pakistani would like their government to show some guts and spine to protect Pakistan’s water rights. India would rather have a war because it feels it can win because Pakistan is fighting insurrection on its western border. Pakistanis realise that and are ready. +Usman Khalid+)

Since our independence 63 years ago, India has not accepted us as a sovereign State. This, therefore, precludes any possibility of being accepted as a neighbour, what to talk of being accepted on equal terms. The Indian dream of “Akhand Bharat” (Greater India) has turned into a nightmare. Their strategy of coercion has evolved from one form to another without check, transcending into a state of frenzy. They have done well on a number of accounts though. Occupation of Jammu and Kashmir was a success; annexation of Hyderabad and Junagarh was a success; waging of three wars on Pakistan and dismemberment of East Pakistan, with the world watching, was another success. Development of large Armed Forces, their nuclear capable Army, Navy and Air Force ranking very high in numerical ratings worldwide, was yet another success. These successes have allowed them to remain in a state of euphoria, encouraging them to explore new avenues in their specialization of hegemony. They are the pioneers of “Water Terrorism”, a term not known to the world earlier. They want to turn Pakistan, the breadbasket of the Sub Continent into a desert, and Bangladesh into a swamp.

Generous as they are, they want Afghanistan to say thank you, by building dams on their rivers flowing into Pakistan, by allowing a free run to their RAW but not so raw, by allowing their Military Trainers into Afghanistan and by getting into the Guinness Book of World Records by establishing a record number of Consulates and “Trade” Offices to export terrorists to Pakistan. The biggest so called democracy of the world, “Shining India” treats its minorities like “Dalits”, a low life form, something the west would probably never understand. Turning the Golden Temple red with the blood of Sikhs, custodial killings in Occupied Kashmir, mass graves, dishonouring women, Babri Mosque, torching of Churches, the festering wounds of Naxals and Maoists are manifestations of their Human Rights record.

Their Miss Worlds are a world away from the thousands of their like, who are being herded like cattle and sold in the region for a shameful life into oblivion. With her ambition for a Blue Water Navy, a distant dream, she has excelled in “Naval Warfare” to dazzle the World. All this with great success, the World sees their Oscars and not what is shown in the Slum Dog Millionaire! Imaginative as they are, with Bollywood and its stunt masters as their Gurus, they have of late excelled in the art of drama. Whether it be the storming of their Parliament, the Samjhota Express, a train that runs between India and Pakistan, shooting down of an unarmed Naval Aircraft on a training mission or Mumbai attacks, they turn reality into fiction – Oscars for them again! Followers of Chankya and Kutalya, they have a history full of deceit. I knew General Deepak Kapoor was deaf, did not know he was dumb too. Taking on China and Pakistan together and sorting them out in 96 hours, some imagination!

India rumbles on, with her cap full of feather: Nepal, Bhutan and Sikkim, a little set back with the LTTE in Sri Lanka but that is just a slight hiccup. A nuclear deal with the US; more with UK and France; successful missile tests; nuclear submarines; another aircraft carrier; contracts for an enormous fleet of state of the art aircraft; and scantily clad American cheerleaders at IPL cricket matches - all is hunky dory. From the Cold Start through Escalations and Stand Offs, all was well - fully coercive, but with no scope for talks. Why this change of heart all of a sudden? A host of theories are making the rounds but I will not dwell on them, for the time being.

Talk we must, but from a position of strength. We need to give up our attitude of appeasement which has crept into us during the last three decades. They threaten us with Surgical Strikes, increase infiltration when they like, turn off the water tap when they like. They outline the Cold Start Doctrine and want to turn our country into a wasteland. Surely, our “Aman Ki Asha” is taken as a sign of weakness as our self proclaimed intellectuals, experts and human rights activists talk of Kashmir and Balochistan in the same context, cementing this perception. Let us talk about Kashmir, Sir Creek, Siachin, your interference in FATA and Balochistan and the cost of our fighting the Global War on Terror. Let us talk of the “help” that you are providing by trying to tie us down on our Eastern and Western Frontiers. Let the dialogue be Composite and fruitful and not another sham. And stop threatening us, with your Gunboat Diplomacy, please; for your Cold Start could be met with a “Hot Start”, much too hot for your liking. You try and kill us with thirst - Damn your Dialogue. ++

Author: Sohaila Salam

August 15, 1975 Coup and the Executions

This is in response to the opinions expressed by Tayeb Husain, Jaffar Ullah and Shabbir Bashar on the subject in the readers column of this esteemed media.

Five of the 12 accused in the ‘Shiekh Mujib Murder Case’ walked to the gallows on the night of January 27/28, 2010. One died in Zimbabwe in 2002. Six others live abroad and hunt for them goes on.

The conduct of the trial and executions raised a host of legal, administrative and humanitarian questions.

August 15, 1975 military coup was a successful one, or at the minimum an army mutiny. Successful coups/mutinies became part of the system, a factum valet and their leaders never faced trial. I do not want to waste time and space in giving examples of successful coups the world over. Bangladesh is the only exception in modern times where saviors of a nation had to face gallows. It looks like the country is in ransom in the hands of a vicious coterie!

Adult generations who lived in Bangladesh on August 15, 1975 and the days after, would recall how people hailed and rejoiced at the news of the coup and its outcome. It was a jubilation compared to the Victory Day of December 16, 1971. Bangladeshis at home and abroad distributed sweets in happiness. I did not see, read or hear of an iota of protest or challenge against the coup anywhere. The coup leaders were treated as heroes through five successive governments for the next 21 years. Things changed when Sheikh Hasina, daughter of the fallen leader, became prime minister in 1996. Hasina earlier vowed in private conversations (ref: Sirajur Rahman of BBC fame and former Col Harunur Rashid of DGFI) that her only objective to join politics and grab statecraft was to avenge the death of her father. And, she remained true to her pledge. Those who now try to look at the event of August 15 and its aftermath differently are either Awami blind copycats in their 40s or below who did not have the misfortune to experience Mujib’s Bangladesh of 1972-75 or they are outright liars or at best opportunist turncoats.

Former Awami League president Abdul Malek Ukil termed Mujib a Feraoun while former speaker and foreign minister Humayun Rasheed Choudhury said in a public meeting in Sylhet in late eighties that if Mujib was hanged hundred times yet he would not be cleansed of his sins (Weekly Sugandha November 1, 1996). Another veteran Awami Leaguer, Mizanur Rahman Chowdhury said in 1977, if August 15 did not happen, Shiekh Moni would have staged his own coup sooner to grab power, eliminating his ‘mama’ if needed.

It was, however, very unfortunate that Shikh Mujibur Rahman, most of his family members and others had to die during the short military action on that day. However, circumstances of their death are not very clear, the dramatization during the trial notwithstanding. From mid-sixties, Sheikh Mujib was a towering political figure in East Pakistan, though not without controversies. There is no denial of his great contribution towards Bengalis’ renaissance and awakening that culminated in the independence of Bangladesh. He was not in the liberation war, but he was the most loved person on January 10, 1972 when he arrived in independent Bangladesh, following his release from Pakistani custody. But, look what he gave in return to the people in his 3 and a half years’ rule instead—death to 40,000 political opponents, the draconian Rakkhi Bahini, the oppressive Emergency, the one-party BAKSAL, the detested 4th Amendment, loss of half a million lives in the man-made famine in 1974-75, just to name a few! The most loved man became the most hated and there was no Innalillah at the news of his death. Those who crow today for their ‘man-god’ Mujib, in pretense or in ignorance, need to revisit the news archives and learn the Bangladesh history a little better, particularly of the period of 1972-75.

I am not aware who all were involved in the August 15 coup, other than those whose names came up during the trial. Awami League likes to believe that former president Ziaur Rahman and many others were part of the ‘conspiracy’. Some even extend the link to the US and Pakistan. Then army chief General Safiullah have been saying what he is worth. However, he admitted one truth: he found most elements of the army on August 15, 1975 supportive of the coup and not willing to take any action to counter the outcome. Brigadier Khaled Mosharraf perhaps came to the chief’s residence that morning in sleeping suit, but according to various reports, he was the first senior officer to react positively about the coup and immediately singed off the release of shells to the tanks in the streets when he learnt that they were without ammunition. One tank and one artillery regiment with about 500 men took part in the coup while one infantry regiment from Joydevpur was to join but could not make it for whatever reasons. Does one need all that to make an ordinary ‘killing’ for which the trial was held? Why were only 12 officers made scapegoats?

A former ambassador, who is known for his opportunist mentality and is often seen in talks shows with his pseudo philosophy, suggested that Col Shariful Haq Dalim be stripped of his “Bir Uttam” title, obviously aimed at pleasing his ‘Apa’. Does this man believe that Dalim was awarded Bir Uttam for his participation in the August 15 coup?

I recall a statement of former president H M Ershad. He told the journalists at the time of his arrest during Khaleda Zia’s first administration, “Khaleda will not remain prime minister for ever and I will not stay in the jail for ever either.” We know the rest of the story. At some future time, when the history of Bangladesh will be known and written in its true perspective and August 15 coup will find its respectful place, will the executioners of today, the prosecutors and judges included, be able to give back the lives of those heroes who saved the nation on August 15, 1975? One may not ignore the fact that on December 29, 2008, fifty two (52)% voters did not want Awami League to run the country. And, no government runs its show for perpetuity.

Since start of the Sheikh Mujib trial, the Awami circle, its sycophants and its sponsored media kept saying that it was not an ordinary death or killing, it was the killing of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, the Bangabandhu, the Father of the Nation and ‘Sorbakaler Sarboshrestho Bangali (the best Bengali of all ages). Even one of the Appellate Judges said so during the hearing (implying the honorable judge sat on the bench with a pre-conceived notion!). Agreed, it was not an ordinary death. Then why was the trial made of an ordinary murder? Bangabandhu, Father of the Nation etc. etc. are political titles, Sheikh Mujib was a political personality. As such, a political motif must have worked towards his death or killing. Why would a group of army officers go to the presidential residence and make it a ‘killing field’? Did the coup leaders have any personal enmity with Mujib? Was there any personal equation between them and Mujib? Did they want to grab the statecraft for themselves? There was no evidence of any affirmative answers to all these questions, yet ironically, the honorable judges failed to look at them. There was no evidence either that those officers acted on someone else’s behalf. Belatedly though, the European Union said the August 15 event was a politically motivated action and could not be tried as simple murder. The Amnesty International, the apex human rights organization, said so repeatedly.

Besides, there was a constitutional indemnity preventing the trial of August 15 coup but the Awami League scrapped the law by simple majority in the parliament, thus violating a constitutional requirement which needed two-third majority vote to do so. That was not rule of law, irrespective of legal interpretation and judgment by partisan jurists.

The appeal hearing started on October 5, 2009 and the judges dismissed the appeals on November 19. Strangely, it took another one month for them to formalize or chart the roadmap to arrive at the decision. As a layman, it looked to me that the honorable judges were under pressure to dish out the guilty verdict in a hurry. During the appeal review, one judge commented that the appellants were trying to touch the moon. What a remark about persons who were standing on the edge of life and death! It perhaps implied that the honorable judges knew in advance, what they would do with the appeals. Indeed, the review hearing got upstaged, superseding over 400 pending cases, to hasten the execution.

The Law Minister, the Home Minister and the Attorney General were in such a haste to hang the accused that they expressed extreme displeasure when the jail authorities waited for the remaining two legal processes to be completed. As a few accused hinted that they would not seek clemency from the President, the jail authorities, albeit at the instance of higher ups, sent clemency applications to the president on their own. The accused, their attorneys and their family members knew nothing about those mercy petitions. Was it to show to the world that all legal facilities were provided to the accused for the sake of justice?

The review appeals were dismissed on January 27, 2010 and the authorities decided to hang them the same night, as if the accused could run away if delayed! Col Farook Rahman’s mercy petition was processed and denied within hours, perhaps setting an unusual precedence. It looked like the elderly president was waiting impatiently with his pen in Bangabhaban to tick the ‘Declined’ button and sign the dotted line. I do not want to go over the media circus that followed; it was despicable and sickening! Disrespect to dead bodies by throwing shoes, spitting or blocking burial was totally against our culture, tradition and faith.

Author: A O Chowdhury
New York, USA

India’s success and Bangladesh’s failure

We have conceded everything that India wanted but we have not managed to receive anything in return except the warmth of India’s friendship. One wonders whether this friendship is between the peoples of two neighbouring countries or between the two parties that have come to power here and in India, writes Professor M Maniruzzaman Miah

THE prime minister Sheikh Hasina was in the Indian capital on a four-day state visit, from January 10 to 13. She was invited to visit India by Manmohan Singh, the prime minister of India. For quite sometime before her visit began, media propaganda in respect of the success she would attain there reached its crescendo. It appeared as though all the outstanding problems between Bangladesh and India would be settled during her visit because of the personal ‘chemistry’ between her and the Indian policymakers, as one minister remarked. Those who have been keeping track of the Indo-Bangladesh relation since 1972 know it very well what a tortuous course it has gone through. However, three days before the prime minister’s visit began, Ashraful Islam, the Awami League general secretary and a minister, and the day before Dipu Moni, the foreign minister at a Bangladesh Institute of International and Strategic Studies discussion meet, threw cold water on people’s high expectations. By that time one would hazard the guess that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs got to know from the visit here of Nirupama Rao, the Indian foreign secretary, how things were going to shape up in the Indian capital. Anyway, it was Bangladesh prime minister’s maiden visit to Delhi after her assumption of office as prime minister for the second time. It was expected, therefore, that she would be given a very warm welcome. And so was it. At the Rashtrapati Bhaban she was accorded a ceremonial red carpet reception. The Indian president awarded her the prestigious Indira Gandhi Prize for peace, disarmament and development.

Besides, she met quite a few influential ministers and high-profile personalities including Sonia Gandhi and former prime minister IK Gujral. On the face of it, she was treated very warmly and well. What Bangladeshis would like to know, however, is the outcome of it all. To be more precise, if a balance sheet of our gains and losses from the visit are made what it would look like. All the events that took place during the prime minister’s visit have been listed and covered in the joint communiqué that was released to the press on the conclusion of the visit. What does the joint communiqué say?

The 51-paragraph communiqué does not perhaps warrant the finesse of a seasoned diplomat to make out what actually it is. Summarily speaking, as one can see, it has two major parts, the accords signed in Delhi, and the main body of the communiqué itself. The accords signed comprise three agreements, one memorandum of understanding and a cultural exchange programme. The agreements include one on ‘mutual legal assistance’ another on ‘transfer of sentenced persons’ and the third one on ‘combating international terrorism, organised crime, and illicit drug trafficking’.

Interestingly enough, the full text of none of these has been released to the press till now, although more than three weeks have passed by since the return of the prime minister to Dhaka. In the absence of such a text, it is not very clear as to what type of criminal matters for legal assistance or transfer (not mutual, why?) of sentenced persons or organised crimes are meant in these accords. May we be permitted to note here that before the Chittagong Hill Tracts agreement was signed in 1997 several thousand rebels of Chittagong origin were engaged in organised crimes of looting, arson, killing, extortion, etc from Indian soil assisted by whom, one wonders! Even now on our south-western border, groups of large number of people under the banner of ‘Bangasena’ or ‘Bangabhumi Andolon’ whose avowed purpose is to slice away a chunk of Bangladesh territory are active. Then, there are a large number of Bangladeshis who fled and reportedly have found shelter in Kolkata from where they still continue extortion threatening over telephone to pay a handsome amount of money to their agents here. Will they come under the agreement of transfer? Perhaps not, for the simple reason that they have not been proceeded against or sentenced.

Our Indian friends want, as it appears, one or two rebels belonging to the United Liberation Front of Asom, who might have been interned somewhere in this country to be handed over to them. Reportedly, one Rajkhowa, an ULFA leader, is in Indian hands under very mysterious circumstances. Another, one Anup Chetia, according to newspaper reports, is perhaps the other person to be handed over to the Indian authorities.

There is nothing wrong in mutual exchange of rebellious people rising against the country’s integrity. But in all fairness, it should have been a two-way traffic. One wonders whether those Bangabhumi-wallahs and the extortionists or terrorists operating from Kolkata or somewhere in West Bengal would be brought to justice and those among them who are Bangladeshis will be handed over to the government of Bangladesh. Also whether or not the commitment made that they won’t allow their respective territory for training, sanctuary and other operations by domestic or foreign terrorist organisations will be fulfilled in letter and spirit.

As mentioned above, one agreement relates to ‘combating international terrorism’. That the presence of international terrorist outfits in Bangladesh may be there cannot perhaps be gainsaid. However, their operational strength is so weak that they have been and they can still be, we believe, controlled by the Bangladesh government itself. Internationalising the issue may pose security problem for us, as some would look at it. We think we need extreme caution to handle the matter.

It is not unexpected that the two prime ministers ‘underscored the need for both countries to actively cooperate on security issues.’ And both leaders reiterated the assurance that the territory of either would not be allowed for activities inimical to the other and resolved not to allow their respective territory to be used for training, sanctuary and operations by domestic or foreign terrorists. This is no doubt a welcome assertion. Let us hope that this would be followed in letter and spirit by both and some of the issues referred to above will not recur anymore and people involved in anti-Bangladesh terrorist activities in India will be handed over to Bangladesh.

‘It has been agreed’ that India will be allowed the ‘use of Mongla and Chittagong seaports for movement of goods to and from India through road and rail.’

It has been ‘agreed’ that Ashuganj in Bangladesh and Silghat in India will be ports of call for inland water traffic.It has also been ‘agreed’ that Agartala will be linked with Akhaura by rail line which will be laid out by Indian finance to be received as grant.

Thus, India will have through passage from any point in that country to Chittagong port and onward to Akhaura by railway up to Agartala in Tripura, that is, transit route from any point in India to another point of the same country, a facility which she has been asking for since quite sometime past. During the earlier period of Awami Rule, transit facility to India could not be granted because of fierce opposition from the people here. Incidentally, to facilitate rail link to Agartala which could have been otherwise cut off from India, Radcliffe in 1947 awarded the Muslim majority areas like Badarpur, Karimganj and Baroigram junctions in the district of Karimganj albeit people of these areas voted massively in favour of Pakistan in the plebiscite prior to Redcliffe award. Thus, what India got as a narrow passage 63 years ago has now got a wide area as transit route to the same place.

But what does the communiqué tell us about some of the burning issues bedevilling our relationship like the Border Security Force of India killing innocent Bangladeshis along the border, sometimes mutilating their body before returning and at others not returning at all, or the yawning trade gap between the two countries or the issue of water-sharing and a host of others. On border killing by India’s BSF, the phraseology used is ‘check cross-border

crime’ and ‘both prime ministers have agreed that the respective border guarding forces exercise restraint.’

By the above not only shooting down Bangladeshis like game birds day in and day out (818 over last 10 years, 94 last year), the Bangladesh Rifles has been bracketed with the BSF. One wonders whether this is just and fair because there is no record of the BDR killing innocent Indians at normal times.

As to the trade gap, India has agreed to reduce the negative list of items to be exported from Bangladesh and also to remove the tariff and non-tariff barriers. Those items have not been listed though in the communiqué but as to the removal of non-tariff barrier, lo and behold, some businesspeople have already been denied visa to visit India. On top of that ‘haats’ have been agreed to be set up on the border, although the modalities are yet to be put in place. It may be recalled that border haats were established after liberation but later on were closed as they became uneconomic.

On Teesta water sharing, it has been proposed that a meeting of the Joint River Commission would be held soon to come to an agreement on the issue. One may recall that a memorandum of understanding was agreed upon between the two governments in 1983 but was never translated into a full-fledged agreement understandably because of non-cooperation from the upper riparian. The memo, as it appears, agreed to allocate 36 per cent to Bangladesh, 39 per cent to India and 25 per cent as environmental flow down the river.

Before any agreement is reached, the two sides must reach unanimity on the flow upstream, an allocation of a minimum of 25 per cent of flow as environmental flow for the sustenance of the river itself and an agreement for joint monitoring of the river flows along its course upstream of the Indian barrage. Unless this is done it will have the same fate of the 1996 Ganges Treaty due to which a large number of distributaries have gone dry and are still drying up

gradually in spite of the fact that

70 per cent of the dry season flow

of the Ganges is contributed by Nepal.

As to the Tipaimukh dam, our prime minister says that her counterpart has assured her that India won’t take any measure that would put Bangladesh in any difficulty. Madam prime minister, may I be permitted to say that the same assurance was given to Khaleda Zia on the Farakka issue when she met the Indian prime minister PV Narsimha Rao in 1992. Such assurances have never been actually followed by action.

India has agreed to give dredger to us for dredging our rivers. Do people know that dredging has been necessitated by sedimentation on the river beds in turn, resulting from low flow from upstream?

We have also assured India of our support to her seeking a permanent membership of the United Nations Security Council.

There are many things more which space does not permit us to go for. Summarily speaking, we have conceded everything that India wanted without getting practically anything in return except the warmth of relationship and friendship of India.

However, one wonders whether this friendship is between the peoples of two neighbouring countries or between the two parties that have come to power here and in India. We say so because the communiqué notes that ‘… Recent elections in both countries presented them with a historic opportunity to write a new chapter in their relationship.’

Everyone in this country with minimum common sense will look for friendship between two countries based on sovereign equality and mutual respect for each other’s needs for development and general welfare and perhaps not between two political parties that may come to power fortuitously at the same time.

By Professor M Maniruzzaman Miah

Professor M Maniruzzaman Miah is a former vice-chancellor of Dhaka

Commentary: Wrong politics destroying human capital and hope of a better future

The general secretary of the main political party of the ruling alliance the other day expressed his helplessness in the face of rowdy atmosphere created in educational institutions and said that his party had no control over the Bangladesh Chhatra League which, he alleged, has been infiltrated by members of the Jamaat-backed Islami Chhatra Shibir.

The Awami League (AL) general secretary deserves praise for his open statement which however has come as a surprise to not only the leaders and members of the BCL but also the members of the general public.

One student of Dhaka University was killed in injuries received during an intra-party clash of the BCL on the varsity campus on February 4. Clash between workers of BCL and the Islami Chhatra Shibir in Rajshahi University led to the death of one BCL member on Tuesday. These incidents were followed by another intra-party clash of the BCL on the Dhaka College campus on Wednesday.

Home Minister Shahara Khatun has ordered arrest of those responsible for the killings in Dhaka and Rajshahi universities. The BCL central leadership has dissolved the Dhaka College committee of the organisation. Activists of the associate student-organisation of the Awami League had by their actions like tender box snatching irked the AL president who refused to continue as their patron and also rejected an appointment of the BCL leaders to see her.

The malaise in the student organisations associated with the major political parties however cannot be addressed without removing its root causes. It is reported that a section of workers and leaders of the student bodies seek to gain financially by taking control of educational institutions. And this is one aspect of unhealthy politics. Political parties and their leaders are utilising their associate bodies without caring for their future. If the students, the future leaders of the country, get misdirected the intellectual capital of the nation would continue to be at stake.

Under the amended Representation of the People Order (RPO), the political parties can have associate bodies, not front organisations, and the parties have submitted their accordingly revised constitutions to the Election Commission as requirement for continuing registration.

In practice, however, the student bodies continue to function as they used to do before, at the instance of their parent political organisations. Thus members of these bodies, who should have campaigned for improved academic atmosphere and better educational facilities, instead engage in internecine clashes to take control of student-dormitories and have say over distribution of rooms for accommodation of students. Of late they have started demanding quota for students to be admitted at their recommendation. This clearly is for financial benefits enjoyed by a section of leaders and workers of the student organisations.

All this could not even be imagined in the past. Student organisations could never have done this if the political parties and their leaders had freed themselves from politics of money and muscle power. Because of such unhealthy politics the Dhaka University Central Students Union election could not be held for the last 18 years even after the restoration of democracy. It’s time that all concerned give up unhealthy politics for the good of the students and the country.

Source: The New Nation

Asia’s changing power dynamics

At a time when Asia is in transition, with the specter of a power imbalance looming large, it has become imperative to invest in institutionalised cooperation to reinforce the region’s strategic stability. After all, not only is Asia becoming the pivot of global geopolitical change, but Asian challenges are also playing into international strategic challenges.

Asia’s changing power dynamics are reflected in China’s increasingly assertive foreign policy, the new Japanese government’s demand for an “equal” relationship with the United States, and the sharpening Sino-Indian rivalry, which has led to renewed Himalayan border tensions.

All of this is highlighting America’s own challenges, which are being exacerbated by its eroding global economic preeminence and involvement in two overseas wars. Such challenges dictate greater US-China cooperation to ensure continued large capital inflows from China, as well as Chinese political support on difficult issues ranging from North Korea and Burma to Pakistan and Iran.

But, just when America’s Sino-centric Asia policy became noticeable, Japan put the US on notice that it cannot indefinitely remain a faithful servant of American policies. Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama’s government is seeking to realign foreign policy and rework a 2006 deal for the basing of US military personnel on Okinawa. It also announced an end to its eight-year-old Indian Ocean refueling mission in support of the US-led war in Afghanistan.

Meanwhile, China’s resurrection of its long-dormant claim to the northeastern Indian state of Arunachal Pradesh, and its needling of India over Kashmir (one-fifth of which is under Chinese control), is testing the new US-India global strategic partnership.

The US has chartered a course of tacit neutrality on the Arunachal Pradesh issue - to the delight of China, which aims to leave an international question mark hanging over the legitimacy of India’s control of the Himalayan territory, which is almost three times as large as Taiwan. Indeed, the Obama administration has signaled its intent to abandon elements in its ties with India that could rile China, including a joint military exercise in Arunachal and any further joint naval maneuvers involving Japan or other parties, like Australia.

Yet, the recent Australia-India security agreement, signed during Prime Minister Kevin Rudd’s visit to New Delhi, symbolizes the role of common political values in helping to forge an expanding strategic constellation of Asian-Pacific countries. The Indo-Australian agreement received little attention, but such is its significance that it mirrors key elements of Australia’s security accord with Japan - and that between India and Japan. All three of these accords, plus the 2005 US-India defense framework agreement, recognize a common commitment to democracy, freedom, human rights, and the rule of law, and obligate their signatories to work together to build security in Asia.

An Asian geopolitical divide centered on political values would, of course, carry significant implications. And, while Asia - with the world’s fastest-growing markets, fastest-rising military expenditures, and most-volatile hot spots - holds the key to the future global order, its major powers remain at loggerheads.

Central to Asia’s future is the strategic triangle made up of China, India, and Japan. Not since Japan rose to world-power status during the Meiji emperor’s reign in the second half of the nineteenth century has another non-Western power emerged with such potential to alter the world order as China today. Indeed, as the US intelligence community’s 2009 assessment predicted, China stands to affect global geopolitics more profoundly than any other country.

China’s ascent, however, is dividing Asia, and its future trajectory will depend on how its neighbors and other players, like the US, manage its rapidly accumulating power.

At present, China’s rising power helps validate American forward military deployments in East Asia. The China factor also is coming handy in America’s efforts to win new allies in Asia.

But, as the US-China relationship deepens in the coming years, the strains in some of America’s existing partnerships could become pronounced. For example, building a stronger cooperative relationship with China is now taking precedence in US policy over the sale of advanced weaponry to Asian allies, lest the transfer of offensive arms provoke Chinese retaliation in another area.

While the European community was built among democracies, the political systems in Asia are so varied - and some so opaque - that building inter-state trust is not easy. In Europe, the bloody wars of the past century have made armed conflict unthinkable today. But in Asia, the wars since 1950 failed to resolve disputes. And, while Europe has built institutions to underpin peace, Asia has yet to begin such a process in earnest.

Never before have China, Japan, and India all been strong at the same time. Today, they need to find ways to reconcile their interests in Asia so that they can coexist peacefully and prosper.

But there can be no denying that these three leading Asian powers and the US have different playbooks: America wants a uni-polar world but a multi-polar Asia; China seeks a multi-polar world but a uni-polar Asia; and Japan and India desire a multi-polar Asia and a multi-polar world.

Author: Brahma Chellaney

(Brahma Chellaney is Professor of Strategic Studies at the Center for Policy Research in New Delhi and the author of Asian Juggernaut: The Rise of China, India and Japan.Copyright: Project Syndicate, 2010. www.project-syndicate.org )

Death of Hope in Bangladesh

The day – January 27, 2010 – will go down in the history of the South Asia as a black day on which five patriotic officers of the Army who saved Bangladesh from becoming the colony of India 35 years ago, were hanged. In one sense it is not surprising because the Prime Minister of Bangladesh – Hasina Wazed – is the daughter of the traitor – Sheikh Mujib – who was the President of the country against who the 15 August 1975 coup d’etat was carried out. It was vendetta, not justice; its shadow will hang large over the political horizon in Bangladesh until the legacy of the traitor is disowned and discredited in Bangladesh. It took Sheikh Hasina 35 years to discredit the heroism of the best sons of the soil as mere murders. It will not take that long to discredit the legacy of Sheikh Mujib who is already seen as the worst traitor in that part of the world since Mir Jaffer.

Bangladesh is the product of conspiracy and war in which Indian intelligence has played the major part. India must be given credit for having been able to continuously recruit popular Muslim leaders in Bengal to betray their fellow Muslims to advance the objectives of India. Sheikh Mujib was a student leader active in the Pakistan Movement and he could have become the Prime Minister of Pakistan in 1971 when he emerged as the leader of the Party with the largest number of seats in the parliament. He met President Yahya Khan and accepted his invitation on 21 March 1971 to form the next government. But he conveyed regret to Yahya Khan after his Indian agent handler came back from New Delhi and informed him that Prime Minister Indira Gandhi had agreed to invade East Pakistan in support of his Unilateral Declaration of Independence (UDI). Sheikh Mujib betrayed his constituency, refused to take office as the Prime Minister of Pakistan, and followed the direction of his handlers from the enemy country. That truth has since been revealed in several books published in India. But the politicians and the press in Pakistan continue to sell the propaganda that the secession of East Pakistan was the inevitable consequence of maltreatment. What maltreatment? No one bother to ascertain or detail!

I had a feeling that the execution of Colonel Farook was imminent. He was like a son to me and I feel sad that he was unable to vindicate himself during those 35 years and get recognised as a patriot and Sheikh Mujib decried as a traitor. But that failure is not an indictment of the five who went before kangaroo courts and suffered long incarceration before being hanged but of the society that allowed that to happen. In LISA Journal published in the first week of January this year, I wrote the following under the title ‘India Tightens its Stranglehold on Bangladesh’:

“The colonization by India of Bangladesh is now in its final phase as the Indian puppet Prime Minister Hasina Wazed – is complying with India’s orders unafraid of the military or the judiciary. The military has been restrained in performing its statutory role to safeguard the national interest as RAW demonstrated its hold on the country in the Peelkhana massacre of Army officers and rapes of their wives by BDR personnel in which Awami League ministers were complicit; the Prime Minister herself gave the rebels three days of time to surrender – time enough for murderers and rapists to escape and some of them even to go abroad while the government spokesmen were creating a smoke screen blaming the Islamists for the massacre. No wonder the senior officers of the military are afraid they might be murdered by RAW agents or dismissed by the Government if they are suspected to be patriots unafraid of India.

“The judiciary of Bangladesh has shown that it will also obey India’s wishes as a Supreme Court Bench, which had two Hindu members, upheld the death sentences awarded to the patriotic young officers who over-threw the government of Sheikh Mujib on 15 August 1975. (Sheikh Mujib is seen as a traitor worse than Mir Jaffer who also became the ruler of Bengal as reward for cooperating with the enemy – the British). The courts ignored the fact that these officers had acted as commanders of their units and should have been tried by a court martial. They also ignored the law of ‘double jeopardy’ as the case of these officers had been considered and they had been given pardon and immunity from prosecution by a constitutional amendment. Hasina Administration has shown its obsequiousness to Indian interests also by handing over ULFA leaders to India even though there is no extradition treaty between India and Bangladesh.

“With the Armed Forces and the Judiciary so intimidated ‘new realities’ are being created quick and fast to prevent any future government of Bangladesh to be able to say ‘no’ to anything that India asks. The construction of Tipaimukh Dam is one; more agreements and contracts to tie Bangladesh to India are in the pipeline.”

I did not have to wait long for my worst fears to materialise. Prime Minister Hasina Wazed has signed an agreement during her visit to India to connect the ports of Bangladesh with India by rail to allow the use of those ports for import/export by India. This had been refused even by her father when he was the President. Pressure to sign such a deal was resisted by every government of Bangladesh. The agreement is still secret and has not been presented to the parliament. Some more executions of Army Officers would pave the way for that as well. The people of Bangladesh are bound to reach the same conclusion that Colonel Farook and fellow patriots reached in 1975. They had concluded there was no way one can stop a government of India protégés except by physically eliminating the leading lights among them. There are no military officers waiting to replicate 15 August 1975. The slaughter this time might be much more widespread carried out by hands unseen. When coming to power and governance becomes one big clandestine operation, politics is carried out by bullets not ballot.

It was perhaps in 1997 that Sheikha Hasina visited London. Invariably, she did not understand the question but her answer, whatever the question, was: “We want ballot not the bullet”. Now that she has opted for the bullet, she is going to have to deal with plenty of bullets. If India thinks that it will use its rail link to physically control Bangladesh – its economy as well as administration- it has a surprise in store. I have no idea what it might be but it would be extremely violent. Sheikha Hasina did succeed with the ballot but having acquiesced to India in compromising the sovereignty of Bangladesh, her days are numbered.

By Usman Khalid

Source: News from Bangladesh

The Flip Side of Kuldev Nair’s Bangabandhu Story

Kuldev Nair’s explanation about the hanging of Mujib killers could be attributed as reductionism and simplistic at best. Kuldev Nair is an Indian and wants Bangladesh’s unquestioned support to India, anything less according to him got to be a Pakistani mentality. AL’ s newspaper The Daily Star in Dhaka one would notice uses a similar approach that any criticism of India even if it is valid got to be from Bangladeshi’s original Pakistani mentality(Muslim mentality).

No wonder due to Nair’s background he suffers from a tunnel vision and that he sees thing only in black and white. We Bangladeshis saw Mujib in two personalities. Nair saw Mujib as a kind and generous person to the Indian Congress syndicate and to the AL godfathers, Nair failed to see the tyrant Mujib who only in three years time killed over 32 thousand of his countrymen in extra judicial killings and like Hasina today also allowed the AL and the SL the looting of the treasury, down to the label of the “bottomless basket case.” It was as if Mujib owned the country and only his socalled AL children had the right to enjoy it. In Mujib’s time, the Mujibbadis quickly became the tender seekers; permit commissioners, the looters of the blankets to sell them in the Indian markets. People didn’t forget the robbers of banks using live ammunitions and what about the famine of 1974 that Amrtya Sen called a man -made disaster was the outcome of Mujib’s failed years. His Forth amendment to turn the country into a dictatorial regime is recorded in history as the climax of Mujib once a Suhurwarthy’s muscleman, turned the father of the nation. This is the flipside of the Bangabandhu story a Congress supporter or a Mujibbadi will fail to see.

Kuldev Nair a Congress supporter due to his tunnel vision failed to see that Mujib was elected leader by his people to wrongly call them ” they are my children.” His death proved that the killers adored the man who once wanted to promote democracy but now killed a dictator. Contrary to Nair Kissinger a better informed diplomat called Mujib the democrat turned a dictator as simply “a fool.” I myself as a biographer of Bangabandhu Mujib like to call him a very powerful South Asian Fascist similar to Musulani of Italy and Franko of Spain but unfortunately the AL calls him the father of the nation.

I hope next time Mr. Nair if not a pretentious Indian historian of Bangladesh politics should educate himself better about the internal dynamics of the country and the reasons why nobody else but Mujib’s own daughter who publicly confessed that her main motive to come to power was to punish her father’s killers initiated the trial of the killers.

References
http://ittefaq. com.bd/content/ 2010/02/09/ news0216. htm

Mujeber Chalera:
Gano Biswabiddyalay-BCL leaders attempt to grab land

Witnesses said BCL activists led by Mazhar and armed with lethal weapons broke down the boundary wall of the university at 7 am and hung signboard
www//The Bangladesh Today .com

Tayeb Hossain, “What thrill and what satisfaction one can find when someone is hanged for whatever reason that hanging could be?,” NFB Feb 2, 2010

Abid Bahar, AN ILLUSTRATED HISTORY OF BANGABANDU AND BANGLADESH

groups.yahoo.com/group/dhakamails/message/4919?l=1
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/notun_bangladesh/attachments/folder/899393398/item/

Author: Abid Bahar, Canada
Source: News from Bangladesh

Muffled screams of Gaza

The recent Egyptian government’s decision to seal the few “tunnels of life” that allowed people of Gaza to bypass the on-going inhumane economic strangulation, its harassment and cruel treatment of the participants of Gaza Freedom March and the Viva Palestina humanitarian convoy earned it a prominent position in history’s page of shame. A page crowded by wealthy Arab nations who failed the Palestinian people and abandoned them at their most vulnerable time.

However, by no means should that sideline drama veil or in any way divert attention away from the root cause of the problem- the over six decades long oppression imposed upon the Palestinian people.

Truth be told: in that period, the state of Israel has occupied Palestine with iron fist; denying Palestinians the right to self-determination and coercing part of their “elite” to surrender into what seems like a condition of eternal subjugation. However, the gravest of all the Palestinian sufferings is embodied in the suffering of the people of Gaza as they endure a vicious economic strangulation unilaterally imposed by Israel . And despite world wide condemnation of that egregious draconian policy, Israel continues to operate with impunity devoid of any conscience.

In their 575 pages report released last September, the fact-finding mission on Israel ’s disproportionate use of force in Gaza appointed by the UN Human Rights Commission has confirmed the ugly truth that most of the Western media were inoculated to under report, or outright ignore.

The mission was led by Judge Richard Goldstone- former member of the South African Constitutional Court and former Chief Prosecutor of the United Nations International Criminal Tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda . And while the report also blamed Hamas, it highlights that “there was strong evidence to establish that numerous serious violations of international law, both humanitarian law and human rights law, were committed by Israel during the military operations in Gaza…actions amounting to war crimes and possibly, in some respects, crimes against humanity, were committed by the Israel Defense Force.”

According to article 39 of the report, the Israeli forces have intentionally targeted and attacked Al Quds Hospital in and the adjacent ambulance depot in Gaza with white phosphorous shells- an internationally banned chemical substance that, among other things, instantaneously burns the human being into skeleton.

However, despite the condemning findings in the report; sadly, it too, has proven yet another exercise in futility. And, though the key recommendation of Goldstone was for the UN Security Council to pass a resolution mandating a credible investigation into the war crimes allegations by the International Criminal Court, no such action has been taken.

In reaction to the report, the US Congress-while succumbing to the “Israel Lobby”-has passed a non-binding resolution condemning the Goldstone Report. The resolution was intended to express unequivocal blind loyalty to Israel , and to pressure the Obama administration to use its veto power (as a permanent member of the Security Council) against any resolution that might expose Israel . Apparently, the strategy worked; and the report is now piling dust in the oblivion.

For whatever it’s worth, it is this kind of culture of impunity that, according to Goldstone, “emboldens Israel and her conviction of being untouchable.” However, this concern was immediately dismissed as anti-Semitic by the vocal blind loyalists and the supporters of oppressive Zionism. Never mind that Judge Goldstone is Jewish, and he is a supporter of Israel ’s right to exist.

Make no mistake, anti-Semitism is a real racist phenomenon; however, the politically motivated excessive use of the term to character assassinate and silence legitimate critics and peace and justice advocates such as former President Jimmy Carter and Archbishop Desmond Tutu simply defeats the purpose.

Meanwhile, though the Obama administration is showing signs of discomfort with the current Israeli government, the U.S. foreign policy toward Middle East is still driven by blind loyalty.

As the Obama administration tries to reduce the post 9/11tension between US and the Islamic world and rein in on the rapid growth of extremism, the Palestine issue remains an open sore that is festering in America ’s foreign policy. And, while the current administration has attempted to demonstrate its intention of becoming an honest broker by appointing a credible diplomat-former Senator George Mitchell-as the Middle East Envoy, Israel continues its belligerent oppression and expansionist policy by defiantly building new settlements.

Led by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman, Israel is adamant to continue the ever-expanding land grab driven by illegal home demolitions and confiscations, daily dreadful human rights abuses at check points, random imprisonment and assassinations, suppression of independent media, and systematic ethnic-cleansing of Palestinians. This, needless to say, has frustrated the Obama administration whose out of the ordinary reaction to Netanyahu’s visit to the US has caused Israel a big embarrassment.

Not since 1990 when then Secretary of State, James Baker, sent a blunt (public) message to then Israeli Prime Minister, Ytsakh Shamir, telling him “call us when you are serious about peacetthe telephone number is 1-202-546-1414” has US leadership sent Israel a stern message that its actions are unacceptable.

And though this was not a decision to stop or even suspend the roughly $3 billion unrestricted aid given to Israel every year, it still turned many heads and galvanized the usual suspects to come after Obama with all sorts of accusations.

In an article intended to rally the troops against Obama, Jerusalem Post’s hawkish columnist, Caroline Glick, wrote “It isn’t every day that a visiting leader from a strategically vital US ally is brought into the White House in an unmarked van in the middle of the night rather than greeted like a friend at the front door; is forbidden to have his picture taken with the president; is forced to leave the White House alone, through a side exit…”.

However, at the end of the day, convincing Israel to do the right thing and to stop establishing new facts on the ground to further complicate an already complex political issue will require more than symbolism. And nothing substantive is likely to happen till the US modifies its one-sided Middle East policy. Meanwhile, Israel will continue business as usual. It might invade Gaza again. Some opinion makers in Israel are already boasting about how “Operation Cast Lead 2″ would look like with the use of “advanced Israeli-made Marakava 4 Tanks”.

Nothing equates to oppression more than the choice that an apathetic witness makes to not, at least, hate the cruelty that he or she witnessed in the mind and heart. And oppression is what Pharaoh and Hitler have done to the Jews and indeed what Israel does to the Palestinian people on a daily bases.

Author: Abukar Arman

(Abukar Arman is a writer who lives in Ohio . His articles and analysis are widely published. Abukar Arman is a writer who lives in Ohio . His articles and analysis are widely published. Source: Just Commertary)

Hasina’s Subservience to India Increased Security Risks to Bangladesh

In an interview with the BBC Bengali Service Radio tuned in Dhaka at 7:30 P.M. on February 7, 2010, Indian Home Minister Chidambaram seemed overjoyed in making a comment with thanks to Sheikh Hasina for her help ‘more than expected’ in containing the ‘terrorists’ of North Eastern India. He was replying to questions about India’s new move for suppressing the Maoist in India.

It may be recalled here that before her visit to India in mid January, she and her government machinery handed over to India some ULFA leaders who had been hiding in Bangladesh for some time. As India has taken up cleaning drive against the Maoist and other dissenting Indian groups operating in the border areas of Bangladesh, the Bangladesh P.M. most likely has fully assured India in other relevant ventures, as well.

Some news item may be of some utility here. When Indian P.M. Monmohon Singh in Delhi was addressing the provincial CM’s and others on the day in the Conference for united containment of the ‘terrorists’, Bihar Chief Minister Nitish Kumar absented obviously for appeasing the Maoist, even so the Maoist derailed several trains in Bihar and killed a police informer as the report went in The Statesman on February 7 (10). The same day, as another report was in The Times of India on the morning of February 8, a dangerous borka clad woman ‘terrorist’ Hafiza Bano was arrested near Srinagar in Jammu. On the same day on February 8 the Maoist derailed another train in Orissa as The Statesman further reported on the 9th morning. All news as they were meant that there are terrorist inside India all over the country from the west to the east and from north to the south. In fact, a reliable statistics state that there are in all 270 terrorist groups now in their active operational activities in India. And Hasina has fully joined much more than Delhi expected in India’s flushing out with more arms and manpower of all left leaning dissenting groups from Indian territories. However, they would not do anything against the extreme right SANGHA PARIBAR- RSS, SHIB SENA, VHP, etc. But, why should Bangladesh join in their rather partisan ‘terrorist’ drive? Is it anything for gains of Bangladesh or only for exclusive gains of Hasina’s own- private, personal and of her emerging dynastic interests?

India is a much bigger country having manpower and resources to look after her own affairs; Bangladesh is very much a smaller entity having to look after increasing demands on scarce resources. In addition, Bangladesh cannot afford to antagonize others, particularly, the Indian dissenting groups who have long been suffering and struggling for seeking justice there but being seriously deprived for decades. Many call their struggle for autonomy as Bangladesh had four decades ago and some for complete freedom as the federal and capitalist framework of development failed to provide minimum social justice to the overwhelming millions in each locality. In many areas the SANATONISTs of millenniums back continue to maintain the very old culture of PURE and POLLUTION that in social effect perpetuated elite status of few as against depressed social position of overwhelming millions majority. Religious minorities- Christians, Budhhists, Muslims, Sikhs etc. have no better position than the so called Dalits, Harijan, etc. or the OBC’s (Other Backward Classes) of the same SANATONIST religion.

The class division and exploitation, apart from poverty nearing destitution of overwhelming majority millions, is not only the stark reality of Indian life and society but also it tends to perpetuate in the free market economy now made its firm grip in India. When, how and in how long she may take to come out of the vicious cycle of unmet minimum human needs and wants (for example, 600 million people do not have minimum hygienic toilet facility as the BBC Bengali Service Radio report aired at 7:30 A.M. on the 9th February morning tuned in Dhaka), degradation of the kind briefly mentioned, despite some dazzling pictures here and there, is very much uncertain. It has as such been obvious that some more intelligent and knowledgeable persons of the same country and of various localities have taken up the full and all possible risks to fight out into freedom from the Indian inhuman system for liberation of the overwhelming majority millions.

The Maoist, as Naxals though started their action programs for freedom in West Bengal in 1960s but later on it got huge followings spread even in Southern India not for anything fancy but for liberation of the millions of depressed classes so created with religious back ups few millenniums ago and kept in lowly placed condition under the SANATON culture, as if they were not human beings. The subjective condition infested with oppression and exploitation by the elite groups, the Naxals have expanded their hold and control on 40% of Indian land territory; it has 20,000 armed cadres in 20 provinces spread over 220 districts, north Bengal in the north and to Andhra Pradesh in the south. All these areas are not only adjacent to Bangladesh territory but are also spread all over the western border. They have massive support in the areas for the people are very sympathetic to them for they uphold their causes and life threatening issues. In the north along the West Bengal border the Maoist of Nepal have natural closeness and rapport with them.

Viewed the position as it is Bangladesh, if it can not do anything to alleviate their position from degradation, she must not put any obstacle in the liberation struggle of those depressed and struggling people, be they termed ‘terrorist’ or anything in pejorative term. Bangladesh must not forget that in similar situation they all came to rescue as they could in 1971.This is what the line of thinking of the overwhelming majority people of Bangladesh Should Hasina care for anything about the genuine feeling and sentiment of the people, she can not line up with Delhi in this area of so called terrorist hunting for India. If she does, as she has already started to do through treaties made recently in January, she had only acted as subservient poodle for Delhi and for further strengthening Delhi’s hold on Bangladesh in further neo-colonization at increasing pace. A report presented by Indian famous journalist Kuldip Nayar published on February 6 in The Dawn, Karachi, have noted a figure of massive balance of trade in favor of India at US$ 6 billion, 3 billion official and another 3 billion unofficial or made through dealings in smuggling goods in favor of India. The open vulnerability of the 4,200 km border with India made the kind of smuggling an easy task.

There is gossip everywhere in varying forms but keeping the central point one that though she knows that Bangladesh would only loose in terms of increased security risk, nothing to gain at all in lending total support to contain the so-called ‘terrorist’, she has other priorities to secure for herself- Delhi’s support for establishment and continuance of the dynastic rule in Bangladesh.

Author: B K Din

Justice sought for 40,000 plus Killed by Mujib’s Rakhsmi Bahini

That the honorable M.P. Salahuddin Quader Chowdhury has for quite some time been demanding to the P.M. Sheikh Hasina that the death of his father Fazlul Quader Chowdhury in 1973 in her father’s government custody in prison be brought into the due process of law. He had his good and valid reason that she has had already brought to trial and executed to death the ‘killer’ of her father, Sheikh Muibur Rahman. As late Chowdhury was not only senior to Mujib but also that Hasina’s father would hold Salahuddin’s father in high esteem, Hasina should not ignore the matter and instead urgently must pursue the matter.

Mujib’s ‘killing’case was finished through the due process but not without collusive executive engagement leading to judicial murder in Political Trial ( See, The Economist, 27 November 2009), in over thirteen years though after about 35 years of the occurrence. If Marhum Chowdhury’s killing case could be immediately begun, it might take much smaller time for she has the efficient party men in the system. But as of now she does not heed to the call. She is unlikely to do.

In the mean time, some other groups have come forward demanding justice for the 40,000 or so Killed by the unconstitutional RAKHSMI BAHINI (disbanded just after the 15th August heroic coup d etat along with the dictatorial lone party BKSAL system as well) by remote control from Delhi in three years and a half of Hasina’s father’s rule (1972 –mid August 1975) and of Seraj Sikder, the left politician and brilliant Engineer killed by his direct order by special police squad on January 2, 1975. The proof of his direct involvement in Sikder’s extra-judicial killing was there in Mujib’s own confession made in the floor of the Parliament right then boasting: KOTHAI AJ SERAJ SIKDER (Where Seraj Sikder is today)!

Yet another demand has come up with yet another issue for justice. The killings burden in 1971 all over the country whatever the total figure was should be a matter of equal share burden, one, on the federal army commander General Yahya, two, PPP chief Bhutto and three, Awami League President Mujib, as they had been the prime actors in 1971. However, as none of them are alive, neither any group nor any person easily available to sue them but to forget, the High/Supreme Court of Dhaka could take up the matter suo moto on its own. If this is done just only to fix quantum of liabilities and perhaps not for anything else as they are gone, neutral and fair judgment could be expected at low expenses and for future unbiased historical record.

The case of Marhum Chowdhury and the 40,000 plus (BBC’s Serajur Rahman, Daily Nayadiganta, February 2, 2010, Dhaka), as well could be included in the common due process, but the burden would constitute additionally on Hasina’s father Mujib alone.
I hope that the honorable M.P. S Q Chowdhury would not differ with the proposal put up herewith.

Author: BK DIN