Tue 31 Oct 2006
Some have asked that why we are discussing so much politics at a human rights org’s blog. Well, firstly as Bangladeshis we are all very political in nature and secondly there is a lot at stake in this election and simply no one can afford to disengage from this process. Rule of law, the essence of human rights, is at stake in this election.
A lot of you are also saying that it doesn’t matter who wins the election. They are all the same. I am alarmed at that line of thinking. I think there is a lot at stake in the upcoming election. I am no fan of AL of today. I was elated when they lost the election. But after the last 5 years, I think it is very important that there is a change of guard in Bangladesh. WHY? Here are the three damages that I am concerned about from the past 5 years. I think it will take a long time to fix this.
1. Institutions: All of our much sacred institutions have been destroyed and politicized. Starting from the judiciary to election commission to the post of presidency to each level of administration, nothing was left untouched.
2. Corruption and thuggary has been encouraged from the very top with complete disregard to the rule of law. Simply put — two words — Hawa Bhaban.
3. Rise of political Islam in Bangladesh and appeasement of extremism have been taken to a new level.
If they come back to power, that will mean that there was no consequence of their misrule in the last 5 years and they will be even more ruthless in their implementation in eradicating the opposition. Disregard to rule of law will become institutionalised. Is there any reason to think that they will change their governing style in the next 5 years? This is a risk that is simply not worth taking.
Now, will anything change if AL comes to power? I don’t know. Some of you think it won’t. I am not a fan of their leaders. In fact, I was elated when they lost in 2001.But I think they deserve another chance. We shouldn’t forget that the AL ruled for 5 years of the last 30 years whereas BNP ruled 15 of those years. I can only predict based on past record on how they would perform in the 3 things mentioned above. If I look at the past record of the ONLY time AL was in power after the fall of autocracy, here’s what I see based on which to judge them.
1. Institutions: An impartial man like Justice Shahabuddin was selected to be the President and a competent man like Mr Abu Sayeed was the head of election commission. The sanctity of the chairs were maintained.
2. Corruption: While there were numerous Godfathers all across the country, there is no reason to believe corruption was encouraged from the very top. Simply put there was no hawa bhaban.
3. Rise of political Islam: Bombings did start during AL regime but there is no reason to be believe that Jamati members and fundamentalists were inside the administration and the extremists were appeased.
But on the contrary, what will happen if the same people who are ruling today come back to power?
Next time you say “it doesn’t matter, both are the same”, really think hard about whether who wins the next election really matters.
Some people said that we should root for the 3rd party and not any of these corrupt parties. To them I say, remember Ralph Nader? The supporters of Nader said Gore and Bush are all the same, vote for Nader - the alternative. Boy, were they in for a surprise. They might comfort themselves thinking they did not compromise with their ideals, but in reality, the damage they did by bringing in Bush to power is irrpairable. I believe that until there is a viable third party, we have to pick between these two parties and try to change the party towards our need. If you want example, look at how they are doing it at dailykos.com. A group of people who are not happy with the direction of the democratic party in the US have taken it upon themselves to make them such a strong voice from the grass root level that their party is forced to listen to them. They did not form a new party. They are working in cleaning the party from inside by building a movement. We can do the same in Bangadesh. But not if we just disengage and complain that “They are all the same”. What happens in our lives is directly related to politics regardless of whether we live in US, UK or Bangladesh or anywhere. The cost of disenagement is just too high. If you don’t trust me, just ask the American voters who are raring to vote the republicans out of power next week to make amends.
October 31st, 2006 at 9:47 am
Exactly what I was thinking.
Perhaps until a credible alternative emerges, the least-damaging solution for BD is for a change in goverment at each election.
A new administration comes in successively to reverse the excesses of the previous one.
To say to the BNP-Jamaat coalition, you carry on with what you have been doing another 5 years because there is no protest coming from the ballot box strikes me as extremely foolhardy.
And yet the AL may come back in hellbent in seeking recompense for the past 5 years. One desperately hopes this won’t be the case. One “dreams” of some humility and introspection, and of course a fair election.
October 31st, 2006 at 9:57 am
Good analysis Asif. I agree with most what you said, however there are something I believe deserve mention too to make it more objective.
1. Ruling party should change for the good of Bangladesh democracy. However, while rooting for a party, as you clearly did in favor of AL, we should exercise a bit caution. I don’t want any repeat of 2001 landslide. That’s makes rulers very undemocratic. My dream scenerio will be to see ALL short by 20-30 seats, where they will be supported by LDP, Gonoforum, jukto-front etc. ( May be not the reality yet, but our stand should be in that line)
2. You should also include shushil shomaj demands while you endorse AL. Do you want me to vote for Haji Mokbul aganst Khondker Mahbubuddin Ahmed or Joynal Hazari against Moudud Ahmed or Bahauddin Nasim Against MK Anwar or Rahmatullah against CTA Siddiki? Where is our stand for honest men’s rule?
3. While you talked about politicization of institutes, a major ommission in your analysis is BNP govt of 91-96. That govt did not do what this govt did, rather the opposition did the institutional policization with the help of M K Alamgir, Shafiur Rahman et el . Not to mention the Janatar Mancha or the AL backed coup by Gen Nasim.
All the policization of institute begin in full swing in 1996, BNP just continued that more shamelessly, aggressively.
If we want to really call the spade a spade, the 91-96 politicization of institute by opposition AL need to be mentioned. I see that is the root cause of last paranoid rampant BNP government.
4. I agree with you totally, BNP must be punished for the corruption, incompetence. A return of BNP to power is most likely to make them an evil empire.
5. But I am still surprised, what makes you unsure about what AL will do on return to power. We already have a sample of two days and they were not even back to power. Can you tally, how many people died and what is their party affiliation? Does it not at all remind you of the post election violence against the Hindu population in 2001?
6. You mentioned of competency of AL with Justice Shahabuddin, Aby Sayed ( Will AL leadership agree with you about this two men?). But I am so surprised to see that you forgot that how Godfathers like Joynal Hazari, Abu Taher, Nasim Osman have been protected from the top or how corrupts like Amu, Tofayel, Razzak, Jalil are still so near the top.
7. About US and democratic party. They changed the leadership under Dr Howard Dean. Can we do it in Bangladesh. An apple can’t be compared with a ‘Dherosh’.
8. So, again, let’s ensure a check and balance and start a new trend.
Let suport an AL return to power, but with significant support from 14 party allies, LDP, Jukto front, Gono forum etc to ensure check and balance.
Let support the honest candidates irrespective of party affiliation.
October 31st, 2006 at 10:14 am
I do not want AL to get two thirds majority. I like to see strong political influence of left leaning parties, LDP over the next government. Similar to the current Indian model.
October 31st, 2006 at 10:20 am
To Rumi’s response, I would also add that it was arguably AL who started the delegitimization of the power-transfer process back in 1991, immediately after the election with the now-infamous phrase “Shukkho Karchupi”. The lack of grace and dignity in AL’s response to what was widely viewed as a free and fair election tainted the aftermath, and it was arguably the first step in the cycle of mistrust and accusation in which we are all now trapped.
I agree in principle with the argument of Asif’s post. However, anyone who reads this post will come off with the idea that Drishtipat is formally endorsing Awami League in the coming election. And personally, I am not sure if that is a good thing for Drishtipat.
October 31st, 2006 at 10:20 am
Nazzina can you confirm whether This Shafi Sami is the brother of Mr Quais Sami. Mr Quais Sami, MD of now closed Oriental Bank, is accused of helping steal billions of taka.
October 31st, 2006 at 10:27 am
This is just my own opinion. Not Drishtipat’s.
October 31st, 2006 at 10:27 am
Rumi: Indeed, disgraceful, I know.
However, not even twin brothers have same characters as you know.
October 31st, 2006 at 10:39 am
Agreed that BNP return is bound to turn them into an evil empire and create even more invincible arrogance attitude (Like Bush reelection and right wing control over both the houses now in the US – HINT HINT!). If AL returns, I would like to see them have absolute minimum edge to assure that they are checked. One thing I loath and WILL NOT look forward to in case of AL return is the mass renaming of public toilets to airports to ‘Bongobondhu’ something!
October 31st, 2006 at 10:42 am
I was excited for first dew days by thought that DP blog was coming up first in web searches. But we can’t sustain a model of either news-breaking or blog chatter, and on neither front would we be unique.
Our focus on HR issues, esp ones no one will touch, has always been our dictinctiveness. Ultimately we would get many more ACTIVE members through this, and those people would stay w/ us. Getting new eyeballs via blog debates is
A) slippery slope. How do u stop Jamaatis/rightists from joining. And when u stop them, what do u respond to cries of censorship
B) a losing game, they will always migrate to somewhere else when there is new game in town (or criticial mass elsewhere). Over last 15 years, SCB, alochona, Bafi, muktomona, and many more have been hot debate locations. But how loyal is that audience in long term, and how much would they contribute to our projects.
I have an idea on how DP can be involved in elections. Rather than looking @ CTG, 10 Advisors, Possibility of Army, etc., all of which are to big for us to have impact on, why not focus on the delicate issue that no one wants to touch - minority voter enfranchisement!
It is my belief that two groups will be kept away HEAVILY from polls through vote rigging, faulty list and threats:
- Hindus
- Paharis in CHT
Former case is well documented, and of course revenge attacks against Hindus after 01 elections spurred Annadaprashad fundraiser, one of DP’s most praised, and high impact projects
CHT issue is less understood, but if you look @ candidates being discussed by BNP in that region, you will see majority are Bengali Muslim candidates. Today DS has list of 4 BNP possibilities for Rangamati, and they are all Bengali, including the infamous SaQa Chowdhury (whose nomination to be OIC head was scuttled after efforts of diaspora Bangalis). BNP’s most prominent pahari member has quit and joined LDP.
AL’s prospectives for 3 seats (rangamati, bandarban, khagrachari) are:
Dipankar Talukdar (former MP)
Bir Bahadur (sitting MP)
Kalparanjan Chakma (former MP)
This sets up pattern for necessity of disenfranchising minority voters, since neither BNP nor Jamaat thinks these groups will vote for them.
Our policy of ethnic cleansing in CHT has reduced Pahari pop there from a overwhelmbing majority to a rapidly threatened minority. This is the dark underside of the same Bangali pride that has blinded us to those who do not fit within the definition of “Bangali” (stating from Mujib, continuing thru Zia and Ershad).
Although AL is only party to at least sign a treaty w/ Paharis, they have too many pots in fire to care about this issue (nor does this issue carry emotional resonance in BD, so blind are we to what Sontag called “the pain of others”). BNP has every incentive to block Pahari vote.
I am not suggesting we become election observers, that is beyond our current means. I suggest we take on a project that is within our means. What about raising a small fund to pay researchers in BD to actually document these issues, which could result in a series of articles on this in DS over next 2 months. Scholarly well-researched articles that would document the data of how much of this pop (Hindu and Pahari) have been left off the voter rolls, and what steps are being taken to prevent their vote.
Do people feel such a project could qualify for a portion of the 20K challenge (why not split that fund between two small projects)?
As many of of us will be in Dhaka for Dec-Jan there may be opportunity to set something up quickly.
I don’t want to overstep any bounds, and there may be other DP projects that are already vying for the 20K, but it struck me today that this is a issue no one will look at and it is vital if Bangali and Bangladeshi are actually to be meaningful terms. Otherwise what difference between Bangladesh today that does not recognize minorities as human beings and a 1968 Paistan that did not recognize Bengalis as equals?
October 31st, 2006 at 11:11 am
Naeem, thanks for raising this issue. FYI, I have already received 3 independent e-mails from contacts in Bangladesh (2 Hindu, 1 Christian) who are terrified after threats their families have received in the last few days (”don’t vote, or we’ll kill you”, basically) and there seems to be a growing fear among minorities that a repetition of the targeted post-election orgy from 2001 will actually kick in before the elections this time (not helped by AL’s performance over the weekend). And, as already documented by newspapers such as DS and PROTHOM ALO, a signficiant proportion of minority voters have again found themselves off the voter list. As the rumor-mongering kicks in and accusations are traded, the minorities will again become a pawn between the two main factions.
Many would argue that in 1991 and 2001 the final result could have been different if more attention was paid to this given the razor- thin margins by which many seats were won, and the huge number of minority voters that were prevented from voting in many of those very seats (there are at least 70 constituencies out of the 300 where minority voters are significant enough to affect the final result if the vote en bloc). Just like the Democrats/African American voters in 2000 vs 2004, it’s not clear to me that AL and others have fully grasped why they need to pay a lot more attention to this than they do. To give a specific example, in 2001 several of us vere involved in monitoring (both from US and on the ground) Barisal-1, where the 4-party candidate won by a majority of 14,000. Yet, it is alleged (and we have a lot of evidence supporting the claim), that over 25,000 minority voters were prevented from voting (mix of voter roll manipulation, intimidatoin and families driven from their homes in the week before the election). This is not to suggest that minorities would not vote for the 4-party or that they should only vote for one side - the issue is being able to exercise one’s democratic right without intimidation.
In terms of being constructive, I agree this is too big a problem for anyone in BD to deal with in 3 months. I think Naeem’s idea is a great one if we can find people to focus on a few constituencies/ regions, particularly those that have a history of minority-voter intimidation during elections (eg Satkhira, Chittaogng etc). Naeem - if you want to work on a proposal or basis for article etc I have a lot of statistics, articles etc that I can share with you.
October 31st, 2006 at 11:46 am
Regardless of which party individual DP members feel sympathy for, if you look at past projects, DPs collective agenda has always been what is best for our country, Bangladesh. I whole-heartedly agree with Rumi when he says:
“Let support the honest candidates irrespective of party affiliation.”
October 31st, 2006 at 12:18 pm
The whole country is at stake in this election.If we can’t have a free and fair election I am not saying like (100%) because I know we are short in preparation for lot of credible process for the election the country would pushed back another 10 years back ward.
We have lot of good things happening in the economy and in surrounding economy like India,China and Malaysia we need to reap some benefits from all of these. The Worl wise news of Bangladesh after Dr Yunu’s Peace Prize winning has a positive impact about Bangladesh in the foreign arena.So its a good time to market Bangladesh to the foreign market in Exports and Investment.People know us now by us not a country near India.
This is a crucial election we can’t let the Tarek Zia generation come back again and plunder our wealth again and run a syndicate. We need to be vocal and at the same time we need to stop AWL LDP and any other parties to do corruption by our high vigilant eyes and information so they know some one is watching.
I am not saying here that if BNP don’t come to power and AWL come to power we would be great but yes if AWL come to power or who ever comes to power again we the common people need to be very active in our daily occurence and we need to question the authority if they are wrong.
So Please every body lets get more and more people family members and friends involve about politics about their rights about who to vote for better leadership. We the commom mass can change the country not those MP’s or Ministers.
People power will rock in Bangladesh not the party power.
thanks
Kawser Jamal
http://www.changeBangladesh.com
October 31st, 2006 at 12:19 pm
I agree with Asif that based on the record, BNP does not deserve to win. The question is whether we have any reason to expect better things from AL.
I am not sure because I don’t have confidence Sk. Hasina learnt any lesson from the defeat in 2001. She and her die-hard followers still seem to maintain a conspiracy theory behind her defeat.
Is fascism Jamat-BNP style going to be replaced by fascism AL style? When faced with terrorist attacks, would she do any better than BNP; or is she going to simply blame everything on the opposition and put them in jail without due process. Recall that BNP put intellectuals like Muntasir Mamun into jail after the Mymensingh Bomb blast. Is AL going to incarcerate all its opponents the same way?
When you have a bad precedent, AL can hide behind it– the typical stalemate argument between Awami-BNP supporters invariably boils down to which party did worse things.
But, these are my fears. Perhaps, after an AL victory, Sk Hasina will display more foresight and magnanimity towards her opponents than she had done in the past. I have to admit I was happily surprised by Sk. Hasina’s immediate reaction to the Presidential take over. Perhaps, she did indeed learn from her prior mistakes. Since AL is so much a party from top down (Sk. Hasina seems to exert total control), her wisdom or lack of it is what people have to rely on, should she come to power.
October 31st, 2006 at 12:34 pm
And regarding ” Rise Of Political Islam”.
FYI,
One of the partner of 4 party aliance Islami Oikyo Jote fraction met Sheikh Hasina today at Shudha Shadan and declared possibility of an elctoral alliance with 14 party.
Earlier, I threw a challenge in web world, can anybody gurantee that, if BNP severs connection with Jamaat today, there will be no open or under surface understanding betwen jamaat and AL?
Can anyone deny the support of Jamaat given to AL during the formation of 1996 AL government?
October 31st, 2006 at 12:47 pm
I am in full agreement with Mr. Saleh’s unbiased and thorough analysis. I believe that unless we have a viable third party, it will be best to have AL come back to power. By no means do I suggest that they will be any better but looking at the track record of BNP and their allies NOBODY can do any worse.
We cannot have a parallel center of power like HAWA BHAVAN.
We cannot have leaders that amass millions through corruption in this impoverished land.
We cannot allow the ruling clique to trample fundamental democratic principles the way BNP and their alliance did over the last five years.
Our people deserve better.
Sincerely,
Reza
October 31st, 2006 at 1:16 pm
It is good that we talk about others and critcize for the failures. I believe that we have missed the Gold digging opportunities like India and China. I thought that Bangladesh might have changed for better future since Dr. Yunus has received the worlwide recognition. But after this violence and killings that occured last few days, this provided a worst picture for the foreign investment in Bangladesh. It does not matter who comes to power, Bussiness communities will think twice that their investement can go to drain for any political agitation in Bangladesh.
We as a nation of Bangladeshi fall so much in politics that this has become a part of our body. The strategies of deveopment, reduction of poverty, investment went to drain compare to India and China.
We as non-Bnagladeshi residents want to help but there is no urgency in Bangladesh Governemnt or people. One of the solution might be that we provide sincere and educated candidates from outside of Bangladesh (non-Bangladeshi residents) to change Bangladesh for the future growth.
We need to find a way to educate people in Bangladesh to elect sincere and educated persons regardless of any political parties.
Please provide suggestion how we can get there. We have the vision, but we need to find a away how to get there, otherway spell out the implementation strategies!
Best wishes,
M. Chowdhury
http://www.amreteckpharma.com
October 31st, 2006 at 1:54 pm
To add resources to Rumi’s posting.
Really our leaders have lot of intregity and love for the nation for that they can do anything. The true sign of Politics coming on now as the opportunist are aligning with each other.
IOJ faction to join 14-party 2006-10-31 Print · Condense
Dhaka, Oct 31 (bdnews24.com) - Bangladesh Nejame Islami Party (BNIP), an ally of the BNP-led four-party coalition, is set to join the Awami League-led 14-party combine.
“The process for joining the 14-party alliance has started and we would announce it within a few days,” says Mufti Izharul Islam Chowdhury, chairman of the BNIP, a faction of Islami Oikyo Jote (IOJ).
Chowdhury met Awami League President Sheikh Hasina at her Shudha Sadan residence Tuesday and had discussions on his party’s joining the alliance.
“We have decided to leave the four-party coalition against the backdrop of price spiral of essentials, severe power crisis and unabated corruption by them,” Chowdhury told journalists emerging from the meeting.
“We have decided to cooperate with each other so that we can win the next election together.”
Asked why he did not quit the coalition when it was in power, Chowdhury said he ‘tried’ to convince the BNP-led coalition on the nagging issues, but all went in vein.
Awami League’s Religious Affairs Secretary Sheikh Mohammad Abdullah told journalists that they have welcomed the Nejame Islami leaders.
“We want to establish true Islamic values. Sheikh Hasina asked them to take part in the next election unitedly to establish true Islam in the country,” Abdullah said.
IOJ, which was a partner of the BNP-led four-party alliance, split formally on April 10 last year with the formation of a faction led by Chowdhury.
With Chowdhury’s planned departure from the IOJ as well as four-party coalition, IOJ faction led by Fazlul Huq Amini is the only faction to remain with BNP-led four-party coalition.
October 31st, 2006 at 2:17 pm
At best the AL deserves a very wary welcome.
(1) Since 1991, the quality of governance has trended towards degeneration. In this respect it makes little sense to compare the AL and BNP. Applying the logic of transitivity, the next government regardless of the premier party would probably be worse than its predecessor. The contributing factors of this unfortunate likelihood are largely systemic, which hitherto no political party has shown the slightest interest in redressing. (For an excellent discussion of the systemic factors see the Nagorik Committee Vision 2021 Paper).
(2) The street wars of last week have provided a clue as to why law and order deteriorates under AL. Clearly party workers who risk their lives on the streets must be remunerated in one way or another — And granting them immunity from prosecution when engaged in unlawful activities is a convenient form of reward. Hence, Barrister Zahir’s tragicomic remark on Channel-i — “The next attorney general is likely to emanate from these street-thugs.”
(3) Both the AL and BNP are fundamentally undemocratic in their temperament. Thus restraining their power in the next Parliament is imperative. Election math guru Kamran Choudhury predicts 180 seats for AL, ceteris paribus. If the past is any guide, a victory of this magnitude is a sure recipe for elected dictatorship. So, why not vote for “Clean” candidates regardless of party affiliation? The best possible outcome of this tactical voting would reduce the AL majority and also install X number of clean parliamentarians. At worse, it would feature X number of clean MPs in a large AL majority.
October 31st, 2006 at 6:47 pm
So much for AL’s commitment to secularism. Bismillah, hajj, mathae kapor, and now coalition with IOJ. The whole noi goj. I am reminded of Farhad Mazhar’s op-ed after Hasina first sat with Gulam Azam in coalition and then later went to “receive” Jahanara Imam’s coffin:
Sheikh Hasina Jahanara Imam er coffin sporsho kore thake opoman korlen
But if we want to do something positive, I think a good use of our energy would be for those who still care about these issues to write a letter demanding that AL drop IOJ from coalition and send it with many signatures.
I am working on an essay on minority vote for DS, expanding my blog post, so it would be good if someone else could do this.
October 31st, 2006 at 7:26 pm
All one has to do is look at GOP “I” Joe Lieberman to remind Nader voters, that Nader was right. Joe Lieberman is no differnt than Bush. Al Gore with his Occidental Oil Company is no different than Bush. Beachel is no better than Haliburton. Nader voters have had enough of a duopoly marching us, election by election, left, right, Dem/Rep, Pot/Kettle, Dog/Pony, Smoke/Mirror to the slippery slope. Innocent people are dying, terrorists are being created and neither major corporate party has a solution.
Nader has solutions and I suggest you educate yourself before you end up in Iraq.
October 31st, 2006 at 7:32 pm
Ralph Nader is a hero of our times, Naders Raders, public interest litigations, ‘Unsafe at any speed’. He is an inspiration to us all He was a real alternative, not just a different side of the same boguey.
I disagree that he caused the democrats to mess up their election campaign. He was genuine and non partisan about his involvement, he didnt keep people out because they peed on another side an ideological fence, if people left him is was because he worked them so hard.
I agree that 5 years of humble pie is a good idea. the awamis were very arrogant before and needed some sizing, as do the present posse now.
If DP is to be philosophically parochial, that is its choice. The ‘Unheard Voices’ subtitle is then quite ironic. Its your right to shield yourself from the parts of bangladeshi society that you dont like and build an (anti)social capital. That way perhaps nothing will fundamentally change and we people will continue to talk past eachother.
October 31st, 2006 at 7:56 pm
Some people are obviously missing the point of my post.
The reactions are just as I expected.
1. Hey a few Awami people lynched their opponent. How can you have doubt about their character, they are not even in power yet.
This logic as ridiculous as saying all muslims are terrorists because a few of them destroyed world trade center.
I expected better argument than this.
2. Hey, look AL did sit with Jamat when they were in opposition. But while I have no way to defend it but I do see a qualitative difference between having them as partner in the movement of caretaker movement and what is going on now where Jamatis like Omar Faruk are getting the home ministry and top BTRC post and Tareq Rahman claiming Jamat and BNP are like brothers from the same monther. Also all the examples given (including today’s) are of times when AL was not in power.
Look, I am not saying that AL is not hypocritical. All I am pointing out is that let’s make sure we don’t lose the forest for the trees.
Agree with Rumi bhai that absolute majority is bad in Bangladesh. That’s why a swinging power for the third force and the removal of article 70 (that prevents floor crossing) is essential.
Also on a different note, am I the only one who is getting a bit pissed about Mr. Yunus’ “amader utshob korte korte nirbachon korte hobe” statements. A bit removed from the reality, isn’t it?
October 31st, 2006 at 8:18 pm
Quoting Naeem Mohaimmen: So much for AL’s commitment to secularism. Bismillah, hajj, mathae kapor, and now coalition with IOJ. The whole noi goj.
Reply:
That is mainstream Bengali muslim culture.
I am reminded of Farhad Mazhar’s op-ed after Hasina first sat with Gulam Azam in coalition and then later went to “receive” Jahanara Imam’s coffin: Sheikh Hasina Jahanara Imam er coffin sporsho kore thake opoman korlen.
Reply: How can someone insult a dead person by touching his coffin? Is Farhad Mazhar a sane Bengali Muslim or a blind disbeliever? Just curious.
But if we want to do something positive, I think a good use of our energy would be for those who still care about these issues to write a letter demanding that AL drop IOJ from coalition and send it with many signatures.
I think a good use of time would be to stop cracking the wall between the mosque and the state
Best,
Irad Siddiky.
November 1st, 2006 at 3:47 am
We’ve had a glimpse of what it’s like having a / THE Bangladeshi Islamic Party within government.
What are the lessons learnt?
All positive / negative / bit of both?
Strikes me that many Deshis whose values and ideals are fully tied in to their faith in Islam will vote for the BNP over the AL simply because they are “seen to be” the more “Islamic” party. Perhaps a partnership with an Islamic party will show that a pious muslim won’t necessarily selling out their Islamic soul by voting for the 2nd of the two credible partys of government - and who they vote for will occupy more deliberation than would otherwise have been the case.
November 1st, 2006 at 5:19 am
I agree with Asif that a change is needed. I also agree with Rumi that absolute majorities corrupt absolutely - this is true everywhere, but especially true in Bangladesh.
One way to reduce the absolute power of the majority party is to repel the Article 70. Another is to introduce properly representative and functionally responsible local government. The reality in Bangladesh is that both sides - Awami League and BNP/JI - have huge followings (each got more than 40% of votes cast in 2001). In our ‘democracy’, the losing side has no say in anything for 5 years. In that situation, what incentive do the self-seeking politicians have to co-operate?
I agree with Rumi that it was AL that begun politicisation of the institutions in 1995-96. But as the first post-Ershad governing party, it was BNP that lost the opportunity to devolve power and institutionalise democracy.
Returning to the theme of 3rd party holding the balance of power, I’d like to know what the ‘man on the street’ thinks.
November 1st, 2006 at 7:09 am
RE: ‘that doesnt represent Bengali muslim culture’
I propose that the political battle field, and history speak to the ongoing diversity and change in the culture.
RE: parliamentary democracy sucks
In the UK, even the rightist are questioning the very system of governance.
A parliamentary majority can by a tyrrany.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,1936190,00.html
In desh it will naturally be less functional as it is a colonial system that we havent got around to refining yet.
I feel that democracy, as practiced doesnt allow refinement in political ideas, enough time to do anything special and culturally impactful.
If there were a greter unity and not such an intellectual bifurcation we’d get more done. but the adveseriality frustrates everybody, except the ngo people and the rich.
RE: AL alliance with an IOJ faction.
Islamic, pious and civilised people exist in the Awami party already, though i doubt they afect its broad social vision, especially at a time when it has had to make 13 alliances in order to maximise its election gundami potential.
The genuine islamic scholars in the country concentrate on teaching, learning and living islam and i guess refuse to ‘go down’ with our business and political classes. We dont need idy bidy islamic parties full of ‘I know the most’ type characters.
November 1st, 2006 at 10:27 am
I would have happily endorsed the primary blog as a good piece if there were mentionS of the following points
1) The open instruction by Sk Hasina to AL activists to bring boitha, logi to halt the country was no less than a treason. How come a x-primer and leader of opposition in democratic institution excites his supporst for such violent measures. This has brought nothing but killing of 28 people. To me she lost the moral groud to lead a nation.
2) Hawa bhaban is the sourse of all corruption, that is the popular belief including mine. But the PMO and PM was not accused. During 1996 govt PM/PMO was accused of corruption for MIG/Frigrate purchase, oil/gas block allocation.
However saying that, and even with my inclination toward BNP, I would not mind AL to form the next govt unless within next two months BNP takes radical actions against Tareq and his misterious financial activities. The whole group of tareq seems misunderstood BNP and it’s support base. They might have thought even the BNP supporters, BNP leaders like Oli are baba’s property. I wonder what zia himself might have thinking about his elder son. shameful!!!
November 1st, 2006 at 11:06 am
Ralph Nader has been brought up to make the point that there is no difference left between AL and BNP. In 2000, I also said, coming from a position of left politics, that there was “no difference” between Gore and Bush. I berated my American friends to go vote for Nader to register dissent. Since then, had much time to think about how much difference there actually is between a centrist position, and a center-right (extreme right once in power) position.
David Remnick summed it well:
As President, Bush has made fantasy a guide to policy. He has scorned the Kyoto agreement on global warming (a pact that Gore helped broker as Vice-President); he has neutered the Environmental Protection Agency; he has failed to act decisively on America’s fuel-efficiency standards even as the European Union, Japan, and China have tightened theirs. He has filled his Administration with people like Philip A. Cooney, who, in 2001, left the American Petroleum Institute, the umbrella lobby for the oil industry, to become chief of staff for the White House Council on Environmental Quality, where he repeatedly edited government documents so as to question the link between fuel emissions and climate change…
If you are inclined to think that the unjustly awarded election of 2000 led to one of the worst Presidencies of this or any other era, it is not easy to look at Al Gore. He is the living reminder of all that might not have happened in the past six years (and of what might still happen in the coming two). Contrary to Ralph Nader’s credo that there was no real difference between the major parties, it is close to inconceivable that the country and the world would not be in far better shape had Gore been allowed to assume the office that a plurality of voters wished him to have. One can imagine him as an intelligent and decent President, capable of making serious decisions and explaining them in the language of a confident adult.
Imagining that alternative history is hard to bear, which is why Gore always has the courtesy, in his many speeches, and at the start of “An Inconvenient Truth,” to deflect that discomfort with a joke: “Hello, I’m Al Gore and I used to be the next President of the United States.”…It is past time to recognize that, over a long career, his policy judgment and his moral judgment alike have been admirable and acute. Gore has been right about global warming since holding the first congressional hearing on the topic, twenty-six years ago. He was right about the role of the Internet, right about the need to reform welfare and cut the federal deficit, right about confronting Slobodan Milosevic in Bosnia and Kosovo.
Since September 11th, he has been right about constitutional abuse, right about warrantless domestic spying, and right about the calamity of sanctioned torture. And in the case of Iraq, both before the invasion and after, he was right—courageously right—to distrust as fatally flawed the political and moral good faith, operational competence, and strategic wisdom of the Bush Administration. In the 2000 campaign, Gore was cautious, self-censoring, and in the thrall of his political consultants. He was even cautious about his passion, the environment. That caution, some of his critics think, may have cost him Florida, where he was reluctant to speak out on the construction of an ecologically disastrous airport in the middle of the Everglades and Biscayne National Parks. But since the election––especially since emerging from an understandable period of reticence and rebalancing—Gore has played a noble role in public life. It’s hardly to Gore’s discredit that many conservative commentators have watched his emotionally charged speeches and pronounced him unhinged.
November 2nd, 2006 at 12:31 pm
Very Interesting Debated started by Asif.The respndents equally had good points and there was lot to learn from this topic debated by the participants.
Here is my view point,hoping this will add to the knowledge of all friends:
AAA Todays political turmoil is a result of the lac of practise of democracry within the Political Parties itself.Seniority and responsibility depends on the desire of the Leaders and presently the business class that can provide substantial funds to the party are nominated over-ruling choice of the decidated
and experienced candidates.
BBB The Elected Representatives cannot voice their opinions on issue basis in the Parliament- if the Leader opposes the entire team has to oppose and vice versa irrespective of the merit of the issue.They are bounded by article 70 of the Constitution– an article that no political Parties have into their agenda to delete–Leaders want absolute contro of all activities of the party nominated Representatives.
CCC Right from 1972 the main objective of Political Parties remained confined to “control” rather then “develop” and control led to Corruption and Lac of Development led to Power crisis,inflation and rising prices of essentials ,greater perecentage of unemployment and no incentive of entreprenurship but increase of musclemen,drug addicts and drug business.
DDD There are more than 80 plus Political Parties but surprisingly none have their own ideology nor abililty to contest independently except through forming Alliances of AL or BNP
EEE The alernative parties that have now freshly emerged consists of members who have been either with BNP and or AL and their performance is mediocre with “Yes Madam” Attitude. They cannot deny their inefficient roles during their period of service with either the BNP or AL.
FFF The present crisis is definitely due to the lac of foresightedness of the main political parties–while one lacked the foresight to understand that the creation of Care Taker Government, in place of a Responsible and independent Election Commission, would definitely be the ground for playing “Palace Politcs” the other lacked the foresight that playing too much of the Palace politics would lead to the crisis whereby the whole Country would remain hostage to the muscle power of the other party leading to confrontaional Politics.
Unless the political parties realizes that these above points are an impediment to their future progress and unless they make efforts to change themselves then no matter which Party comes to power we will see a Repetition of the Past-Very sad to say that. I hope this points will be taken into consideration to understand the whole picture and Dristipath will make efforts to make a project to Change the attitudes of the Policians first.
NOw since Dristipath is also a Human Right Acitivity organisation I would like this organization to ask their conscience and that of the Peshajibi Ain Korkochari shangstha too as to why they can speak and give support to the Political party to press the caretaker goverbnment to carry out their responsibility well but fail to discuss with Political parties to say that is is highly illegal and undemocratic to demonstrate in the heart of the City with lathi and boita–the emotionally chaarged followers cause d havoc and destroyed the livelihood pf many poor personnels who were trying to establish on thier own–see all newspaper and you will get the stories of many small entrepeneurs who had become subject to loss because either AL or BNP activist destroyed their means to livelihood. Where is the conscience of the Parties that are oath bound to taaaaake care of its Citizens and where is the conscience of the Peshajibi Ain sangstha,CPD n other human right organizations.and members of thje Civil Society organisation that hold so many seminars –but to what effect–did these poor people get any support from these to reprimand the Political organization and ask them to provide them fund for resume their small business once again.
Hope my points here wouldnt 0ffend anyone here–time to think and time for Citizen to react as like in Kansat–the People there didnt care a damn for the Political parties that visited them after they had suffered badly–thats what we all citizen should do and YES vow not to Vote unless the Candidate declares his wealth statement,biodata and agenda for development specially online to take initiative to have article 70 deleted from the constitution.
Thanmk you all for yr patience.Best wishes.
November 8th, 2006 at 11:01 am
Rumi what do u mean by these comments
“You should also include shushil shomaj demands while you endorse AL. Do you want me to vote for Haji Mokbul aganst Khondker Mahbubuddin Ahmed or Joynal Hazari against Moudud Ahmed or Bahauddin Nasim Against MK Anwar or Rahmatullah against CTA Siddiki? Where is our stand for honest men’s rule?”
Moudud Ahmmed is in my opinion is the worst Hecker of our Law. In Fact If you tell Moudud is an Honest Man, I think defination of Honesty should be changed.
Regards
Tanoy