Thu 27 Dec 2007
Benazir Bhutto was assassinated today. As the details are still sketchy, this event is surely to have a tremendous impact in Pakistan and also South Asia in general. It will make countries rethink their strategies about various countries in South Asia including Bangladesh. The khichuri that has been created in Pakistani politics is a stark reminder of what unintended consequences may happen when artificial solutions to local problems are forced upon. Benazir was shot and then a suicide bomber blasted a bomb — almost reminiscient of August 21st, 2004 when Bangladeshi opposition leader Shaikh Hasina’s assasination was attempted when a bomb blast was followed by targetted shooting. We don’t want another Pakistan in Bangladesh.
December 27th, 2007 at 3:03 pm
Ayesha Siddiqa on Sky News.
Assassination Alley
December 27th, 2007 at 3:16 pm
Ayesha’s warning about Bangladesh is loud and clear
Dr Ayesha Siddiqa
Daily Times
Monday, December 17, 2007
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2007\12\17\story_17-12-2007_pg3_4
Ayesha Siddiqa is a scholar specializing in military & security affairs & the author of the recent well received book entitled, “Military Inc, Inside Pakistan’s Military Economy”. She did her doctorate from King’s College London in 1996 and has worked on issues varying from military technology, defense decision-making, nuclear deterrence, arms procurement, arms production to civil-military relations in South Asia.
In their eagerness not to be compared to Pakistan, the Bangladeshis have failed to notice that they are slowly creeping towards a situation subtly comparable to Pakistan and that if they are not careful, the military would soon begin to play a decisive role in the country’s politics
Talk to an average Bangladeshi about civil-military relations and they will tell you that their country is not like Pakistan and that they will never allow the military to take control of politics.
Unfortunately, in their eagerness not to be compared to Pakistan, the Bangladeshis have failed to notice that they are slowly creeping towards a situation subtly comparable to Pakistan and that if they are not careful the military would soon begin to play a decisive role in the country’s politics. They must also realise that the elite of any country might be as myopic as that of any other country and may push the country to political disaster.
Bangladesh started its transition to democracy in 1991 when public protests put an end to the rule of General Ershad who had taken over after the assassination of his predecessor General Zia-ur-Rehman. Since then, the army has not returned to politics. Bangaldeshi political historians always forget the botched coup attempt of 1996 when Generals Naseem and Hilal Murshad conspired to take over. Had the military been fully professional then, which means tightly organised as a hierarchy, it would have managed to take control of the government. The fact that the conspiring generals did not have good communication channels with the battalion guarding Dhaka and could not convince some generals to move from strategic positions saved the country. So, in 1996, there were elements in the army who had the ambition to gain power.
However, the civilian rulers entered into an informal partnership with the military according to which the government would ensure the military’s interest in return for the latter staying out of politics. This arrangement could be managed because the armed forces were not completely professional. The legacy of the Bangladeshi military is a mix of freedom fighters and officers repatriated from the United Pakistan armed forces. The friction between the two schools of thought did not allow for the kind of consolidation of perception and interests which would result in building up of a praetorian military. The officer cadre was further enticed into submission through the opportunities gained from participating in the UN peace keeping missions. Apart from the defence budget, the military depends on the UN to obtain resources for the gratification of its personnel.
Some of the UN money was later re-invested in exploring other possibilities for economic expansion by the armed forces. The Bangladeshi military has used some of this money as venture capital and established stakes in business and industry which is also a carry forward from the pre-1971 Fauji Foundation.
Since the past ten years, there have been three developments in Bangladesh which have had an impact on its politics.
First, the military has consolidated its corporate ethos and culture which means that the organisation is building cohesion within itself which it lacked earlier. Along with this, the military has also become more conscious of its interests, which includes personal stakes of the officer cadre. For a military which was basically meant to provide security against external threat to Bangladesh, the bulk has now become engaged in the UN peacekeeping missions. Whether peace-keeping missions are the core task of a professional military is a moot point.
Second, a gap has emerged between the people and the political leadership. The politicians have become more intensely authoritarian and myopic in their thinking. Such a transformation is not new but dates back to the times soon after the country was born. However, the predatory instinct of the politicians has intensified resulting in policies which would destabilise the country.
Third, there is the development of an equally predatory middle class which is willing to use the military as a secondary partner to change the current political arrangement. Since the Bangladeshi political system is patronage-based, the common man is not able to look beyond Sheikh Hasina and Khalida Zia. The problem of the educated middle class, on the other hand, is that while it is not willing to ‘soil their hands’ in the ‘dirty game of politics,’ they would like to take power away from these two female leaders. Resultantly, the educated middle class is quite happy to use the military and unfair political means to change the domestic scene.
For instance, while making a speech in Canberra the Bangladeshi advisor on foreign affairs claimed that the caretaker setup in the country denoted the rule of ‘Baudhulouk’. This term means educated and more capable; it was traditionally used by the Calcutta elite to refer to themselves. The underlying message of the gentleman, which more or less represents the perception of the educated middle class, is that there are new groups which are ready to replace the old leadership. Since mass politics is too dirty a game, these new power aspirants will use unfair means and the military to negotiate power. These people would rather have military help them with some rigging than let Sheikh Hasina and Begum Khalida Zia return to power.
Surely, the two ladies must share their part of the blame for letting things come to this point. The misuse of power and ill-conceived policies rarely bring fruit. For example, the BNP strategically encouraged the Jama’at and other religious extremist factions to their own advantage. Interestingly, Khalida Zia was not the only beneficiary of cultivating religious extremism. The military benefited both directly and indirectly. A more rightist society is bound to be more nationalistic in a narrow sense.
However, the problem is that using the military is never a good option. This is not an organisation which can be trusted to remain a junior partner once the civilian policymakers and stakeholders begin to use it to gain power.
Pakistan’s example is a case in point. The 1958 coup by the civil bureaucracy was not meant to bring in the military. But once General Ayub decided to take over power, there was nothing which could stop him. Sadly, we are still unable to check the military from gaining power.
Any Bangladeshi might argue that their armed forces and society are different. They will not let the military rule for long nor will the army try to come into power directly. There are two points which are worth making.
First, the army does not necessarily have to come directly into power. The organisation could become influential while remaining in the back seat and yet constantly destabilise politics.
Second, the Bangladeshi ruling elite is no different from any other, especially when we look at the manner in which it has sought to use authoritarianism and military force to its own advantage. They, like any other short-sighted and predatory elite, have completely forgotten that people are not to be taken for a ride. Too much tempering with the masses, the propensity to use extra-constitutional methods for transfer of power, and inability to deliver services to the public leads to a certain disenchantment amongst the common people. The people no longer take active interest in politics nor do they offer their lives to stand up for right against wrong; in any case, after a while, they are unable to tell the difference.
The Bangladeshi state and society at this point is very close to getting on the track of Pakistan’s politics. Its elite and middle class must evaluate the advantage of using short-term versus long-term perspective to life and politics.
December 27th, 2007 at 4:23 pm
Since Bangladesh was originally born as a brother of Pakistan (as E.Pakistan), from the same mother, and grew together for 24 years from 1947 to 1971 - it is inevitable that the 2 wings will have similar characteristics. That fact is undeniable.
Yet similarity between BD and Pak was not just in military takeovers, but the absolute failure of civilian govts to contain constitution, corruption and conflict.
Bangladesh must shed old methods of thinking, escape out of the box, and remodel their mindset in order to truly SEPARATE from the grip of pre-colonial ancient chaos. Some modern Asian countries have set excellent examples.
If there is one word that both Pak and BD needs in order to redevelop their nations, that one word is LAW.
Nothing functions until there is absolute LAW, whether in constitution, in economy or in the street.
December 27th, 2007 at 4:47 pm
This trend has been started from the death of Rajiv Gandhi and really don’t know when it will end. Holly of blood which is played in South Asia only God knows the end of it.
December 27th, 2007 at 6:38 pm
It is a dark day for Pakistan. Those involved in this type of heinous acts aren’t serving anyone. We pray and hope that Pakistan would come out from this turmoil.
Some people are too quick to draw similarities with Bangladesh. Terrorism is a worldwide phenomenon, stretching from the most powerful country in the world to the sternest secular one. Quick generalization shows nothings but a distinct motive.
Terrorism has nothing to do with any religion. Unfulfilled expectation draws people in to terrorism. Though, religion might work as a motivating factor. As Siraj pointed out, there are other factors to it as well. Probably, the number one reason for this problem is the gap between ruling elites and citizenry. As authoritarian a government as bigger the gap is with its people. Muslim countries are at the centerfold of this crisis because of this problem.
20th century was a century of rising nationalism due to colonialist policy of divide and rule. With independence, a desire of self rule created greater public demand for all around freedom. People started to get back to their roots which often went against the wish of foreign powers or new imperialists. Peoples desire to get back to their religious roots often forcefully subdued. Systematic secularization put governments and cronies head to head with its people resulting in to a tit for tat attacks.
Governments’ activities against public will wouldn’t possible without the loss of public freedom. Overtime, tugs of war make government authoritarian and turn publics into vigilantes.
Government should be ‘of the people, by the people and for the people,’ any other way would result in anarchy.
December 27th, 2007 at 7:01 pm
My condolences to the Bhutto family.
It’s all shrouded in mystery. Why did she return? Who directed her to take an openly anti-taliban stance before being elected to leadership knowing well enough the danger and threat of the taliban menace? What was Karzai doing in Pakistan the day she was assassinated?
Has she been knowingly served as a bait to the assassins? Why was she in exile for eight years? Who decided that she be allowed to return? Who was dictating Pakistani politics? Who was behind the militarisation of Pakistan? It seems that after Mujib, Gandhi and Bhutto it’s their children who are being targetted. Who is behind destabilisation of Pakistan? How will the region stop the spillover of the taliban-US war into the whole region?
Pakistanis have to seriously do a lot of soul searching to answer the questions.Rest of the world especially China, India and Russia have to rethink and reorient their military and security options in the region since a civil war torn nuclearised Pakistan could be the biggest threat to her next door neighbors.
American involvement in the region is fanning the flames of militancy-based islamic terorism instead of dousing it. Taliban has infiltrated Pakistan including it’s army. There’s a real danger of islamic terrorism being exported to restive regions of China and Russia, India and Bangladesh.
Therefore, it’s high time that these countries immediately convene a summit outside the UN to take up the Pakistan conflagration and immediately address it by restoring a democratic government, detoxify the recalcitrant anti-people army and put Pakistani nuclear weapons under joint Russian-Chinese supervision.It is in South Asia’s interest that Pakistan’s integrity and sovereignity is restored quickly through true democracy, though ironically by active engagement of two countries which are either undemocratic or newly democratising! America’s duplicity and double standard in foreign policy is hurting the cause of democracy in South Asia. China and Russia should pursue a more active foreign polcy in the region before it’s too late. A nuclear mishap will devastate not only the economies badly but also impact our long term environment and health matters.
December 27th, 2007 at 10:11 pm
From 1947 to 1971, the main goal of pakistan’s ruling elites was to keep away Bengalis from the corridor of power. After ‘71, to cover their crime in east pakistan, the same “axis of evil” went to liberate Afganistan and built a Frakenstien with Uncle Sam. Pakistan is a country invaded by its own army. If the army stay away from power, the Frankenstien will take over. No hope for democracy in Pakistan.
abuwardha #5
“Some people are too quick to draw similarities with Bangladesh….Quick generalization shows nothings but a distinct motive.”
I hope you know about all the bombings and grenade attack that bangladesh has experienced
in the last few years.Ramna Bombing, 17th August country-wide bombing, Mymensingh Cinema hall bombing, 21st August Grenade attack, all these are linked to the same extremists group, educated and trained in some madrasas in Bangladesh or Pakistan.
DGFI is following the path of ISI, our military backed CTG is trying to wipe out corruption in ‘musharraf style” , “civil society” is thinking that “Jolpai take over” will establish “true democracy” and “reforms” while the Godfather of democracy, Uncle Sam is clearly supporting this. Is it very difficult to see the similarities?
“Systematic secularization put governments and cronies head to head with its people resulting in to a tit for tat attacks”
So secularism is the root of all problems. As far as I know, pakistan is known as Islamic Republic of Pakistan. since 1947, they have gone through excessive dose of “islamaization”. The country that has suffered “systematic secularization” since 1947 is the largest democracy in the world right now.
December 28th, 2007 at 8:00 am
What are lessons for Bangladesh? The obvious ones are:
- the futility of minus-2 style ‘reforms’: anyone who still thinks that what’s happening in Bangladesh is substantially different from what Musharraf has done in Pakistan is living in a fool’s paradise; and
- the dangers of religious extremism: and let’s not mince words, in the case of our two countries, the extremism is based on a warped understanding of Islam (those who think excessive secularisation is the problem in either countries obviously know a different reality than I).
Beyond these two, it would be interesting to see what happens to PPP. It has large mass following across the country, but by no means is it organisationally strong as say the Indian Congress. It doesn’t have an ideological core like the Indian BJP. And it’s not a cadre-based party like Jamaat or the Indian communists. The parrallels to Awami League and BNP are self-evident. Bhutto’s children won’t be mature enough for politics for at least another decade. I’m sure the ‘reformist’ AL-ers and BNP-wallahs will be observing carefully.
And how the Americans react to another coup and postponement of election (the most likely outcome) will be watched carefully by our uniformed men.
December 28th, 2007 at 5:21 pm
Lessons for Bangladesh:
1. Dynasty based politics has no policy foundation, it is basically CULT POLITICS. Without Bhutto, PPP has no philosophy, the party is almost a cult based on Bhutto family worship. Because there is no policy foundation, such dynasty-based parties collapse when their leader is absent, same goes for AL, JP and BNP.
- Does AL and BNP have any national philosophy, besides Mujib and Zia? Sorry to say, No.
2. Need leadership who resolves conflict, not create conflict. Did PPP, AL and BNP resolve conflict? No. Should we hail parties and leaders who create conflict? No.
3. Extremism and cadre-politics has to be treated like serious criminal acts. Mastani in colleges and in public are criminal terrorism. These crimes must be severely disciplined, not nurtured by religious or sentimental license.
4. Law and order must be ROCK-SOLID against extremism and student terrorism.
5. There should be no room for crime in democracy - whether misuse of power or abuse of corruption.
December 28th, 2007 at 7:54 pm
It is far more significant than the supposed thought that we are in the same course as Pakistan is the future reaction of the world leaders to the impending course of actions that we will see in Pakistan. I am sure our nation and our leaders will be vigilant to decipher from the world reaction to assemble our own course leading up to the election in 2008. I hope emerging powers and neighboring India, China and Russia will stand up instead of leaving it all to Uncle Sam as those three countries have as much to worry about the possible trouble brewing in nuclear outfitted Pakistan as United States does. Of course a cloud of uncertainty formed with this event as far as economy and stability of the entire region is concerned but events that are about to unfold in Pakistan and more importantly what our big brothers endorse will have great influence in shaping our own path.
December 28th, 2007 at 9:30 pm
Rehan, you’re quite right about what the world does about Pakistan is very important. Of the countries you mention, India and Russia don’t really have any leverage over Pakistan. China is a different matter. But does anyone really believe that China will call for a free election and demilitarisation of Pakistan?
The most likely outcome is another general taking over. Americans and Chinese may support it because they’re convinced that Pakistan is green one way or other, at least with the generals it’s a friendly hue of green.
If this happens, then what signals will our ‘leaders’ get?
December 28th, 2007 at 11:46 pm
I think in the short term, contrary to the conventional wisdom, the minus-two formula may gain a new momentum in Bangladesh. The argument will be that exile or imprisonment is the best option to protect the two leaders from similar assassination attempts. Recall that in Arif’s case, his personal security was cited as one of the reasons for his imprisonment. I wouldn’t be surprised if the army backed CTG actually came out to claim that their stepping into the scene in 1/11 actually saved us from the quagmire Pakistan finds itself in at the moment.
In the long term however, as Rehan (#10) and Jyoti (#11) have pointed out, it will matter more on what the world does about Pakistan and also what happens inside Pakistan. For instance, if elections are held as scheduled and the King’s party takes a beating because Benazir’s assassination triggers the opposition into forming a formidable anti-Musharraf alliance, current leaders in BD will can the minus two formula in a heartbeat and go back to their divide and conquer mode.
December 30th, 2007 at 2:41 pm
Here we go again. Democracy South Asia ishtyle!
Bilawal Bhutto named co-chairman of PPP.
But he’s only 19 and barely speaks Urdu. Bilawal just began his studies at Oxford, after living in Dubai for eight years–almost half his life. While Benazir spent her adolescence and early adulthood as her father’s political apprentice – even accompanying him to the Simla negotiations with Indira Gandhi – Bilawal has had no similar training.
Pathetic, just pathetic.
P.S. Spare a thought too for Christ Church College, who now have one hell of a security headache to deal with.
December 30th, 2007 at 10:46 pm
The assasination of Benazir Bhutto is regrettable. May her soul rest in peace. The media immediately started portraying her as a savior of democracy in SE Asia. But the decision to nominate her husband as to succeed her as the PPP chief that in turn resulted in a 19 year old as the party chief proves that she, like many other leaders in our parts of the world, had very little, if any, respect for democratic processes.
Pakistan is playing and will keep on playing a vital role in world politics and peace. Now, the fate of billions will be influenced by the leadership of a 19 year old boy!
This is not only pathetic, this is shameful and disgusting. The onus should lie on world media to send a clear message that this is wrong and should be criticized severely.
December 31st, 2007 at 1:51 am
Zubaer and Shahed, it is not as simple as that. Forget the sound economic rationale of brand recognition that results in the leadership of George W Bush or Rahul Gandhi in established democracies. As Chapatimystery, a Pakistani blogger and historian, says:
“Benazir’s 19 year old son, Bilawal, has been named successor to Pakistan People’s Party - to keep the dynastic aspirations intact. And why not? There is no democracy outside of the party, no reason for it to exist within. One can call this a reflection of the feudal structures left untouched by many a pseudo-revolutions; one can point to the long history of the pir/spiritual guide’s extension into the political realm; one can blame lack of political education and access to corridors of power for the members of PPP; and one can acknowledge that the military regimes have sufficiently retarded all venues of political legitimacy, such that there simply cannot be any alternatives to the once-future leaders - Bhuttos, Jatois, Bugtis, Sharifs. Whatever the case you wish to make, reality is that “politics” in Pakistan has, and will, remain a hereditary, charismatic domain built around cults of personalities - until and unless electoral politics takes firm roots.”
http://www.chapatimystery.com/archives/homistan/round_up_x.html#comments
There is food for thought in that para for us as well.
December 31st, 2007 at 5:35 am
Jyoti, Benazir Bhutto’s reign as the head of the country was not really a ‘golden era’ in Pakistan’s history, we all know that. It was, as many other third world democracies, blighted by nepotism and corruption. We need to recognize the fact that many a times poor governance severely undermines democratic institutions to such extent that it is easier for an autocratic/military regime to take over and be welcomed by the mass. Then the military regime starts to destroy all political avenues and we send an SOS to another Bhutto or a Gandhi. They become the hope of the nation, power is served on a silver platter, and most of the time they gradually become the epitome of nepotism, corruption, bigotry……and the vicious circle continues….
“…Whatever the case you wish to make, reality is that “politics” in Pakistan has, and will, remain a hereditary, charismatic domain built around cults of personalities - until and unless electoral politics takes firm roots.”
…And electoral politics will never take firm roots as long as this dynastic cult is in practice. Leaving a crown prince or princess as heir to power (whether in writing or implied) does not have a track record of flourishing democracy anywhere. I don’t think Benazir’s will/PPP’s decision can be rationalized on any ground.
Part of my outburst was towards the irresponsibility of the media, too. A lot of them were quite skeptic about Benazir Bhutto’s intentions and the idea of ‘power sharing’ with Gen Musharraf until a few days ago. But now the eulogies have grown out of proportion and the deification is almost complete. The dramatization, popularization, and sensationalization of news by the media is becoming unacceptable every day. We need them to portray ‘Benazir’ as ‘Benazir’ and not somebody else. I am sure that there will be editorials, probably a lot of them, criticizing this decision by PPP and Benazir Bhutto in their own little section. But why can’t this be a first page header? Mass opinion is formed by media on many occasions, mass is also educated by the media and they don’t read the editorials. It would only be responsible on the part of media to send a quick message that this is a bad practice and even though Benazir Bhutto had many qualifications as a leader, this was probably not a good decision by her.
Shahed
ps: I am not anti-Benazir or anything like that. I have just used this instance to point out common misconceptions and role of the media. I, also, have nothing against an offspring of a leader who engages in politics and works his/her way up the ladder to a leadership role.
December 31st, 2007 at 5:38 am
And on a different tangent,
‘Why do we want (SE Asia and third world) ‘savior’ s all the time when it comes to politics? Is our political grounds unsuitable for natural growth of ‘leaders’?’
Would really appreciate if somebody can shed some light on this issue.
December 31st, 2007 at 8:10 am
I believe the S.Asian psychology is deeply-rooted in the concept of heredity, probably based on the Hindu Caste system. Because all S.Asians were essentially of hindu origin, the culture of hierarchy of heredity plays significant role in selection of leadership.
Add to that the legacy of feudal and Nawab monarchy, the blood-line of Brahmins, devotion of Buddhas, and we have a SUBCONSCIOUS system where the cult of personalities plays unparallel rooting in the choice of leadership.
Mrs Bhutto had already written Bilawil Bhuttos name in her will, to replace her “lifelong chairman of PPP” title, in her absence. So it’s not just people who follow the dynasty CULTS in S.Asia politics, but Leadership themselves also ENFORCE the succession of their heredity.
Unfortunately, while this system attracts the SAsian psyche, it is bad news for democracy. True democratic leadership is not sported, but a cult of family worship shrowds the lack of development of democracy, and the nation itself.
December 31st, 2007 at 12:34 pm
KGazi, you’re perhaps right about the deeprooted cultural reasons for the ingrained cult of personality that we see in South Asia. Note, however, that the cult of personality is much less pervasive when democracy is allowed to take hold. In India, Nehru-Gandhi clan has a strong hold on Congress. But Congress is not the only party, and even within Congress, Gandhis have to accommodate other leaders.
Shahed, you’re perhaps seeing much more than Mannan/Chapati wrote and I conveyed.
Benazir’s rule was not the golden era, sure. One particular irony is that it was the second Benazir government that encouraged the rise of Taleban. Before that, ISI’s favourite among the Afghan mujahedeen was Ghulabuddin Hikmatyar, who was allied with Jamaat-e-Islami. Benazir’s home minister Gen Nasruddin Babar financed Taleban in order to circumvent ISI’s grip on the Afghan war. Ironic then that Taleban is now implicated in her assassination.
But I don’t think Mannan is claiming that Benazir was the champion of democracy or anything like that. Mannan’s argument, and mine too, is that unless there a few full terms of constitutionally and democratically elected government, it’s hard to see how the cult system will break down. And Pakistan never had that. No prime minister in Pakistan’s history lost office through an election, and except for Zulfi Bhutto, every single one was fired by the president/army well before their term was up. Cult system is not conducive to democracy, but it is only sustained democracy that can end the cult system. External pressure / artificial solutions / attempted quick fixes usually backfire with unintended consequences.
Linking it to Bangladesh, we’ll do well to remember that history doesn’t allow short cuts.
December 31st, 2007 at 6:09 pm
Jyoti,
It is pretty obvious that cult-politics is the root-cause of S.Asian democratic failure,
Implying that military was at fault for the failure of civilian govt, in Pak and BD, and not the CULT following, fails to adress the crisis that in fact there is no democratic foundation in the cult-politics system.
By saying “democracy was not allowed to hold (by the military”) turns a blind eye to the issue that these cult-leaders prefer to sustain their cult dynasty rather than let go of their cult-following to the freedom of the people, for them to decide and choose more COMPETENT leaders.
In both Pak and BD, “democracy” (or civilian govt) WAS allowed to take hold, at least for 3 terms each. But in both countries those 3 terms ended in a total declining and descalating national stability.
There was absolute dogfighting between rival cults -Bhuttos vs Sharifs, Sheikhs vs Zias - to the point when both places ended in failed stated crisis, only to be recovered by the military, not aborted from “democracy”, but from the declining stability in govt, due to dogfighting between cults.
It is pretty obvious that cult-following politics is a primitive, destructive, undemocratic and proven failure in Pak and BD.
The fact is, the current system is not even democracy. In order to “allow democracy to take hold” at least 3 things need to be done:
1) The people must REJECT the cult of family succession in democracy. In the case of Bilawil Bhutto, people should protest, by rejecting PPP if he becomes automatic leader!
2). The constitution and Law must prevent “lifelong leadership” of political parties by cult leaders. The ELECTORAL LAW needs to be REFORMED in both Pak and BD, so that these laws are implemented against cult politics, BEFORE the next new term begins.
3). Successors in parties must be ELECTED by party members, and not willed by the family.
If these issues are explained to the people, then people will have a better understanding of what is ‘democracy’ and what is ‘cult dynasty’. This is the essential requirement for democracy to be allowed to hold.
December 31st, 2007 at 10:57 pm
KGazi, democracy was never allowed to take hold in Pakistan. Bhutto and Sharif were each fired twice by the army/president, even when each had enough support in the parliament and years left before their term ended. If you think this is democracy then we have different concepts in minds.
Also, it is simply wrong to say that cult politics preceded military intervention at least as far as Bangladesh is concerned. Cults of Mujib and Zia arose in the 1980s - after these two men were killed by the sections of the army. Mujib’s rise to Awami League leadership was through internal party rules, not because he was son of a leader. His daughter was chosen by the party as leader after he and the entire 2nd tier of party leadership were killed in coups. Zia formed his own party and shunned family members from joining it. After his assassination, party leaership and indeed the country’s presidency changed through constitutional means. Only after the constitutional process was thwarted that his wife was chosen as the party leader. To ignore this history and say that ‘cult politics is the cause of all our problems’ is not right.
In your comment 18 you say ‘I believe the S.Asian psychology is deeply-rooted….’
And then in in comment 20 you say that a bunch of things must happen immediately before democracy can take hold. So problems deeply rooted in thousands of years of history is going to be wiped away overnight. Utopian dreams like that usually result in nightmarish regimes.
I don’t think anyone would disagree with your prescriptions in principle. But anyone who thinks that these changes must happen or will happen overnight, or a military dictatorship will implement them, is just deluding themselves.
January 1st, 2008 at 1:44 am
Jyoti, Both BD and Pak had 15 years plus to make democracy take hold. During that time the civilian leaders (Bhutto Sharif Hasina Khaleda) had the power of parliament and policy control to apply the prescription, that I listed in #20. But they did not implement those basic concepts.
Not that they didnt know. We can blame the people for being illiterate and uninformed, but with international PhD degrees Mrs Bhutto and Mrs Wazed DID know. But it was against their (cult) interest to do so.
The military were forced to cut short their terms in Pakistan, because Sharif and Bhutto each filed EXTENSIVE lawsuits against the other, for grand corruption.
If people are left free to decide, they will chose their cult leader, because of the S.Asian psyche. And that is what the cult leaders have capitalized on. If left to their design, the cult leaders will NEVER change the system, even in 200 years, and real democracy will neve take hold.
But if Electoral laws are changed, then there will be no delusion or utopia. THAT is how things work in rest of the world.
And Laws CAN change a system OVERNIGHT, even with a primitive psyche, Dubai Singapore and China are excellent examples. Even modern democracies like USA and UK are founded on ancient ideologies, but Electoral Laws guide their democracy to prevent cult worship.
The military MUST take that action and ensure the ELECTORAL LAWS are changed to prevent cult politics in both Bangladesh, and Pakistan, (per my prescription in #20), because cult politicians will never do so, it is against their interest. The Game Rules must be defined against cult-politics.
And the TIME to do that is January 2008.
January 1st, 2008 at 6:42 am
Jyoti,
“..So problems deeply rooted in thousands of years of history is going to be wiped away overnight. Utopian dreams like that usually result in nightmarish regimes. ”
Agreed. But we must start somewhere. I was not surprised at PPP’s decision or Benazir’s will (well a little at that actually). It was expected that the party leaders will look for a Bhutto to succeed. Surely, the mass will gather behind this boy in support and PPP leaders will get what they want. That has been the norm. But how will that serve to establish democratic processes? I guess my question is, what is our responsibility? How should the intellectuals, the educated middle class, or the media react to this kind of decisions?
If the criticisms start now, may be 30 years later it will not be this easy to leave a will like that or people will think twice before seeking out a Bhutto. If a few rejects the decision openly now, may be 20 years later the majority will, too. People in our parts of the world think it is natural that political leaders and their families are entitled to extra privileges. They need to be aware that ‘rajniti’ ‘rajar niti’ noi, eta ‘nitir raja’. It is not at all about the politicians, it is about them. If the process is really slow and long, we are already way behind.
Nothing good can come out of combatting one evil (autocracy) with another (dynastic cult).
January 1st, 2008 at 3:56 pm
This is I what wrote on the same issue in a different blog,
… you have to remember that the subcontinent has a different reality and people (For whom political parties are for) are very much aware of this reality. Let me give you the example of recent BNP turmoil. Mannan Bhuiyan was number two man in BNP. He betrayed with his party in the twinkle of an eye to accommodate the political ambitions of another general. A big chunk of the top tier leadership ran behind him in the hope of a continued ministerial perk. Most of AL top leadership ran to Bangabhavan to again take oath as ministers while Bangabandhu’s bullet ridden body was still lying at his staircase. Similar thing happened in 1982-1983. In fact this is an ever repeating scene in sub continental political scene. In Pakistan every time a general came into political scene, the dynamic political top tier will run towards him. India has also seen her share of mindless political maneuvering and immoral greed driven politics.
A Rajiv Gandhi, a Khaleda, a Sheikh Hasina or a Bilawal can take over party helms only because the party grassroots want it ( and BTW, this is democracy). If they didn’t, this would never have happened. And the grassroots want it because, in addition to emotional attachment to the biological heir of their leader, they also see it as a safety net to prevent someone from hijacking the party.
January 1st, 2008 at 6:45 pm
Rumi #24,
The picture you painted above, unfortunately reminds us of the movie ‘Godfather’ where mafia cults run around leaders ridden with bullet holes, and to prevent someone hijacking their teritory, the godfather’s crown is passed on to the next son in his will. The new leader then protects the gang, (with more bullet holes and assassinations) and the cult following of the family continues, until there is more killing and emotion.
Human nature is the same everywhere, whether in the subcontinent, Italy or USA. Emotional attachment to cult families as in the mafia, and hijacking of a cults territory as in ancient China, were not RESTRICTED to the “reality of the subcontinent” alone. It happens everywhere.
In the subcontinent however, due to the absence of laws in the electoral system for preventing AUTOMATIC FAMILY succession, the subcontinent’s civilian politics is being run like feudal mafia cults, not like modern democracy.
We have now arrived at a situation where, democracy is a virtual MIRAGE in the subcontinent, where the CRUCIAL ELEMENTS of Law for leadership succession, cultism, and Electoral laws, have all contributed to a chronic failure in stable civilian govt.
To achieve ‘democracy’ and stable civilian govts in the subcontinent, the MOST important step will be to eradicate the practice of (mafia type) family cultism in leadership, thru laws and amendments in the Constitutions.
This crucial correction of subcontinent politics CAN and MUST be undertaken overnight, before another 36 years pass by in repeat failure of govts.
January 1st, 2008 at 10:32 pm
I absolutely agree with Rumi (24).
January 1st, 2008 at 11:45 pm
Shahed (23) … what is our responsibility? How should the intellectuals, the educated middle class, or the media react to this kind of decisions? If the criticisms start now, may be 30 years later it will not be this easy to leave a will like that…
—-
Yes, if we start challenging cult politics today then 20-30 years down the track things will improve. But let’s be realistic here, it will take 20-30 years if not more. Let’s be realistic that it will be a long hard slog, and short cuts will backfire.
Rumi bhai talked about what happened in BNP. Well, right after 1/11, when Mrs Zia appointed her brother to the party’s top body, there were strong reaction from the party men. Left untouched by the regime, who is to say whether this challenge to her authority wouldn’t have led to genuine party reform? Of course the regime interfered quite nakedly. If as a result of this Tarique Rahman emerges as a popular hero, how will that be for the country or democracy?
So, we have to accept that changing political culture is a long process. And interesting that to describe opinionmakers, you use the term ‘educated middle class’. I’d suggest that we, the members of this class, venture out of our green zone and talk to ‘less educated lower than middle class’ folks. If we are to change the polticial culture, we need to change their hearts and minds, and to do that, we need to understand what they think about the issues.
If you are in Dhaka, I suggest going down to local party offices. I suggest listening to the conversations in the barber shops and chaer dokans. I suggest asking the rickshawpuller his opinion about Hasina/Khaleda. If in London, there is a place called Gram Bangla in Banglatown. I suggest discussing politics with its regulars. If we want to affect politics with our writing, our writing needs to reflect the reality. Let’s try to understand the reality a bit better.
KGazi (22): The military MUST take that action and ensure the ELECTORAL LAWS are changed to prevent cult politics in both Bangladesh, and Pakistan, (per my prescription in #20), because cult politicians will never do so, it is against their interest.
In case you didn’t know, Musharraf banned Bhutto and Sharif from politics. Then he cut deals with politicians when the going got tough for him. Looks like military dictators don’t care about reform when it’s against their interest either.
Still, happy for you to keep your faith in the military.:)
January 2nd, 2008 at 1:11 am
Shahed - I am glad you agree that cult dynasty is the wrong way to run a govt. And it should not take 30 years or even 30 days to make a change in the system to abolish cultism in politics, AFTER a national electoral law is passed.
Many laws in BD have been effective overnight, especially when the govt has really intended to make it happen.
—
Jyoti - I have more faith on the military for creating reforms on Electoral Law against cult politics, than on cult politicians
If you agree and grasp what I have been saying about Cultism in S.Asia Politics, that this is the greatest weakness in our failed governance, then bloggers have a responsibilty that we must share with our govt.
Bloggers must CONVEY to the govt, thru any media, newpapers and blogs, that CULTISM MUST be forbidden by law and constitution changed, for us to jump-start immediately to true democracy.
January 2nd, 2008 at 5:51 am
Jyoti,
I did not suggest a revolutionary change or something overnight. All I am asking for is a process to start and the intellectuals, media, and middle class to come forward with the message. I am sure you did not mean anything personal, but it would be unfair to assume that I am not in touch with reality. I am quite familiar with Bangladeshi politics and mass psyche. That is why I did not expect the mass to reject it. I expect the intellectuals and middle class to lead the mass, not follow them. And that is where we are failing.
We do need to question why BNP or AL top leadership was so fragile under very little pressure? Why they had to run helter skelter within minutes of regime change? What happened to the internal integrity of these good old parties or was there any? And if not, why not? It will always be easy to ‘hijack’ a party if undermining practices continue within (dynastic cult being one of them). A Bhutto can only sustain it for a while and it will be more vulnurable in the long run in most cases.
Of course, the grassroot workers wanted a Bhutto. I can imagine the high emotions among the PPP workers. They would want a Bhutto as a symbol and a future leader. They voted ‘yes’ for a boy to be the leader. That is ‘democracy’ indeed. If that suffices our demand for democratic processes then I have nothing more to say. Then we will have to live with the fact that our mass elected the Hazaris, Falus, and Ershads. Given the opportunity, they will be voted to power again, I am sure. ‘Democratic elections’ or ‘voting’ is not a panacea, I think most of us agreed on it on a previous thread. Especially, in a country like ours where majority is illiterate and poor, people have fewer choices (in reality), are not really aware of their rights and responsibilities, are subject to easy manipulations, and are constantly told to have low expectations.
May be in some other thread we can discuss the success of ‘democracy’ in third world countries.
January 2nd, 2008 at 7:32 am
Shahed (and KGazi and everyone else), I meant absolutely nothing personal. My suggestions are a collective (self) criticism.
You’re absolutely right that elections are not panacea. And democratic governance is a process that evolves over time. Regular, competitive and fair elections are one necessary condition for democracy. They are, however, by no means sufficient. Look at India - even after 60 years, its democracy is still evolving.
What Mannan/Chapati is saying is that in Pakistan regular elections and an end to military interventions are needed before cult politics can be weeded out. And I think he is absolutely right. I also think this is just as valid in Bangladesh. You said earlier that we have to start somewhere. My contention is that the ’somewhere’ for Pakistan is regular elections and end to military intervention. For Bangladesh, we should add and end to winner-takes-all set up. Ending cult politics will follow after that. Otherwise we are putting the cart before the horse.
January 2nd, 2008 at 1:23 pm
**Democracy in S. Asia**
Is there any universal definition of democracy? What worked well in the west, may not be effective in other countries. Perhaps, S. Asian brand of democracy ought to be different from western style. Perhaps, we need a democracy, which is a modified version of feudal-tantra. Our literacy is not 100% yet. General people only care about basic needs. Anything other than those needs, are meaningless.
January 2nd, 2008 at 4:49 pm
Jodi Kichu Mone na Koren #31,
Universal definition of democracy is
Of the people, by the people, for the people.
S. Asian definition of democracy:
Of the Bhutto, by the Zia, for the Mujib.
January 2nd, 2008 at 6:55 pm
Jyoti,
I think I understand what Mannan Chapati is trying to say. But everything is interrelated and we cannot afford to take care of one thing first(autocracy) and then jump on to another (dynastic cult). Slowly but consistently we need to hammer both these practices till they break down. Promoting dynastic cult to take care of autocratic govt is also trying to find a shortcut solution, right? So, I disagree and let us just leave it at that..agreeing to disagree :).
However, I would like to see your (and everybody else’s) take on ‘democracy in third world countries/ SE Asia’.
January 2nd, 2008 at 9:58 pm
I think KGazi’s comment in another thread, alluding to conflict management, would afford a better understanding of the underlying causes and would lead to a different set of conclusion. The dynastic cult is not the cause but simply a response to two sets of forces; one cultural (in a sociological sense) and the other institutional.
If you look broadly, the dynastic cult is operative not only in politics but in free marker institutions as well. The problem needs to be looked at as a challenge of sustaining large organization in a pre-professional society where the prevalent radius of trust does not extend beyond the immediate family. Other countries where such tendencies have been prevalent have dealt with the challenge either by allowing the state to become the principal arbitrator of conflict through a large public sector (such as China) or allowing stable family based conglomerates to develop in the private sectors (such as South Korea). In both cases they chose to deal with corruption after they were able to attain some form of institutional and economic stability.
The only reason in Bangladesh people look at the military as their savior right now is because it is the only remaining large public sector institution that has not fallen prey, yet, to the cultural propensities towards familism and low trust. Reading Ayesha Siddiqa’s article (#2), one gets the impression that while the political parties and the civilian bureaucracy had been rotting at their cores, the BD military had slowly brought back the professional ethos and corporate culture, putting it a position of considerable strength and stability when compared with any other large institutions-—political, market or even educational.
Relying on the military for the short term solution will end up destroying the only remaining functional, professionally run, large, stable public sector institution we have left, because the mission is beyond its capacity to fix. The culture of corruption that has permeated through all of our public sector institutions is not going to disappear by simply putting the army in charge. They are, after all, a product of the same society and will be infected by the same disease.
So if dynastic cults are what provide a mean to sustain a large political institution like BNP or AL, one has to embrace this stability and then look for ways to bring back professionalism. And towards that end, elections do provide a mean to keep working at the problem as a continuous process in small chunks rather than thinking, mistakenly, that a quick fix through the military is in the offing.
If you think that ridding Bangladesh of Hasina and Khaleda has made it a less of a “Mamar Bari” than before, I urge you to check your sources. If you do, you will find that different, and perhaps bit more expensive and sophisticated Mamas are in charge; you can pretty much get anything done as long as you are part of the family.
January 2nd, 2008 at 10:54 pm
It’s a huge sigh of relief and encouragement for our detained politicians to see a 19 year old boy succeeding her mother to uphold the tradition of family politics. People of Pakistan (according to PPP) wanted to see Mr. Kid man as their savior and instantly he became the king of a country. Rather than calling it as a democracy I prefer to label it as the contumacy of democracy. This kind of practice of democracy only intrigues in my mind that “Are we ready to accept the democracy”?
Just wondering, how old our Tareq Zia’s daughter is, and is she old enough to be the BNP’s next Chairperson in case rest of the family members are punished and eventually disqualified to represent Zia family in BD politics? Let’s cross our finger for her arrival….long live S. Asian democracy!!!
P. S. KGazi vai I just loved the way you explained about S. Asian democracy.
January 3rd, 2008 at 12:50 am
Jyoti,
Regarding democracy not evolving and cult politics I agree on your take of Pakistan where democratic govts were interrupted. But it is difficult to believe that for BD. Uninterrupted 15 years and 3 democratic transitions is a decent amount of time to evolve a decent bit of democratic practices. Your theory would hold if we saw things were getting better [however small] ? Unfortunately we were noticing degradation in every aspects. BNP for example, cult-politics was getting ever stronger. I think we all know writing on Hawa Bhaban wall:
Zia was our past
Begum Zia present
Tareq Rahman future
Can you explain by leaving things uninterrupted, things would have moved for the better ?
Thanks.
January 3rd, 2008 at 1:23 am
EH, suppose the Fakhruddin government kept to a 120-day emergency limit and delivered a reasonably free and fair election. It is quite likely that such an election would have resulted in a collosal defeat for BNP and its allies. After that defeat, would there have been any reaction from the BNP rank and file against the Hawa Bhaban clique?
I think it is quite possible that there would have been. Consider what happened in March when Mrs Zia appointed her brother to the party’s top body without consulting anyone? There were genuine protests against this move. It is quite possible that faced with a massive defeat, BNP rank and file would have demanded soul searching.
Of course we would never know what might have happened. Consider what is likely to happen now. Tarique has been in jail for nearly a year now, and not really much has happened on the legal front. Why? Is it because the current regime is incompetent? Is it because the regime doesn’t want to really try him because they may cut a deal with him in future? Is it because the regime is actually trying to promote Tarique’s stock? Is it because Tarique is really innocent? Whatever the correct answer is, it is quite possible that instead of being thrown out of politics for the disgrace that he was, Tarique Rahman is going to come out of this whole process as a ‘hero’ among the BNP base.
Anyone connected with Bangladeshi reality would not dispute this. Now you tell me, how has this intervention helped us?
Mahmud bhai, thank you for a lucid and nuanced explanation of the way things are in Bangladesh.
January 3rd, 2008 at 7:19 am
Mahmud Farooque #34, “So if dynastic cults are what provide a mean to sustain a large political institution like BNP or AL, one has to embrace this stability”
–
Two problems -
1) dynastic cults also gave mafia gangs their individual stability, should we embrace mafia gangs too? Cults only provide stability to the queen of the party, but not democracy to the people.
2) cults create non-stop instability due to rivalry BETWEEN cults.
“..and then look for ways to bring back professionalism.”
—
Professionalism can only be brought by rules and laws, not by giving a license to ‘mamar bari’ or ‘mogher mulluk’, hoping things will evolve.
“And towards that end, elections do provide a mean to keep working at the problem as a continuous process in small chunks..”
—
“elections” between cults and mafia gangs provide no solution to problems, usually those ‘elections’ are neither clean nor accepted by the rivals, leading to hartals boycotts and oborodhs. Just running elections without rules are like running olympic games without referees.
Instead, the game rules must be defined BEFORE the elections, rules which focus towards democracy, and against cultism.
“..rather than thinking, mistakenly, that a quick fix through the military is in the offing.”
—
Military are only a part of the current govt equation, they are not the only ‘Mamas’, But if they do have more professionalism that the politicians (as you stated), then shouldnt we WELCOME their suggestions and actions for a reform, so that the next elections do not become another mafia/cult exercise?
“..If you think that ridding Bangladesh of Hasina and Khaleda has made it a less of a “Mamar Bari” than before..”
—
The idea of anti-cultism reform as a PRECURSOR to democracy, is not to get rid of Hasina and Khaleda - but to prevent their great great grandchildren continuing hartal and oborodh 100 years from now - after they both had been willed to succeed their assassinated uncles and aunts!
If we dont change the cult politics culture NOW with electoral laws, before elections resume, then Bangladesh will continue to drown in corruption, cronyism, cult-dynasty, poverty and feudal politics.
January 3rd, 2008 at 7:23 am
Dear all,
Thank you everybody, for your interesting intellectual level debate over the state administrative problem, cult-leadership and support, killings and blood-resolve of revenges: in other word the problem of democracy. I’m with you but see these political problems in little different way. I see as the soley due to atttempts of adopting and assimiliting unupdated democracy.
The traditional democracy started from the west. They are exporting or frenchizing it to all over the world without the advice that the democracy in every country of the world can be or should be tailored to their best need and the receipe ingradients amenable to modification or adjustment based on their own resources as Bangladeshi Mc-Donald-French-fries should be from Bangladeshi Potatoes, shorsher thel, palm-oil or Badam thel, whatever.
Democracy should have been the best system but it so far failed for neglect by its patent-holders. By democracy we literally mean “Rule of the people, for the people and by the people.” But how far it’s true in real life, be it staggering democratic or steady democratic states.
In fact, what we see is, democracy became the rule, of the party, for the party and by the party instead of people. Democracy is said to be the rule of majority, where there is, democratically, a profound chance for the minority to be left out or discriminated against. Simple majority is good enough to committ injustice to the minority and if it’s 2/3rd majority, then smaller minority,even, have to be ready to tolerate all injustices and atrocities committed by the absolute majority, in the sacred parliament house in the name of democracy. Funny thing about traditional democracy is, that, thanks to it’s multiparty system, if there are more than two strong parties, the majority can be ruled by minority. A party voted by 40% voters can rule over the 60% people who didn’t vote for the wining the party among the multiple strong parties.
Moreover, democratic notion is that, as a state or country should be administered by the elected representatives, democracy is coined as the rule of, by and for ‘demos or people’. But the democratic elections miserablly failed in ensuring good, honest and capable people get elected to represent people in the parliament. Many a times we witness criminals, money-launderers, scoundrels with muscle or gun-power get elected. Democracy, instead of, rule by the true elected representatives, become by the rule of rogues. And the party top touts become the exclusive beneficiary of the system, not the people and even the grass-root level workers of the winning party.
And the parties become the source of ideology or clan-based emotional cult-kids. The parties and their cult supporters become the pre, intra, and inter-election source of pita-pitti/mara-mari/Kata-kati/Khuna-khuni. Look at Keneya now, look at Bangladesh, look at Pakistan, look at anywhere of slow-world countries.
We have been suffering from killer disease ‘Unupdated Democracy’ as it became a infectious political cancer for the the third-world countries.
Unless the world invest good portion of its resources to innovate the best or Super State Administrative Craft[SSAC] free of parties
[BTW, the parties is the best tool for dividing people, even, in a homogenous society with same ethnicity, language, color, religion, caste, creed etc.] and cure it’s ineherent defects, world will continue to have this political rows and riots perenially here and there, sometimes leading to wars, mass-murders, ethnic cleansing or genocides.
The west has the patent-right for democracy and exporting or frenchizing it and so have the obligation to research on democracy to have a better exportable quality product.
Thanks.
January 3rd, 2008 at 10:19 am
I suggest this read up from an imran khan interview…
key dekhe shekhe, keu theke shekhe
http://www.thedailystar.net/forum/2007/december/imran.htm
January 3rd, 2008 at 12:08 pm
Thanks Asif S. for the link.
Imran Khan said during the interview: “I thought he (Musharraf) was the messiah who had come to save us from the political corruption that ruled our country for years. But pretty soon I realised that was not the case..When I was close to Gen Musharraf, the ISI would come to me and show me the detailed file on all the politicians and all their corruption. But soon I saw that the very same information was used not to try them but to extort them so that they would join his political party.”
Hmmmmmmmmm…ki mone hoi?
January 3rd, 2008 at 12:58 pm
Ershad and Khaleda-Hasina had given us the experience of both ‘Dekhe (Zia-Ershad) and Theke Shekha (Khaleda-Hasina)’. From a military government people get what they expect (i.e. autocracy) on the other hand from a cult leader in BD as well as in S. Asia people never get what they want (true democracy). Neither cult nor an autocratic ruler should be considered as a savoir of a country. Only way out of this situation is to reform the electoral law which Kgazi vai has already mentioned in this thread.
January 3rd, 2008 at 12:58 pm
Last 36 years we were conned by the both cult and autocratic leaders. Era of Zia-Ershad and Khaleda-Hasina had given us the experience of both ‘Dekhe (Zia-Ershad) and Theke Shekha (Khaleda-Hasina)’. From a military government people get what they expect (i.e. autocracy) on the other hand from a cult leader in BD as well as in S. Asia people never get what they want (true democracy). Neither cult nor an autocratic ruler should be considered as a savoir of a country. Only way out of this situation is to reform the electoral law which Kgazi vai has already mentioned in this thread.
January 3rd, 2008 at 3:46 pm
The recent political history of our country as well as Pakistan tells that both cult and autocratic leaders are failed and none of them had any intension to establish the true democracy. The question is how can we get rid of these two types of rulers? Is it introducing a new law by the autocratic rulers (depends on their intension) or wait 50 to 100 years (maybe more) to see the gradual changes by the practise of true democracy which also entirely depends on the cult leaders mentality and their intentions. Now people of the said countries should decide which one is suitable for them.
January 3rd, 2008 at 5:39 pm
Man by nature may be political, but politics by nature is corrupt.
In politics there is no such thing as a ‘messiah’ - they will all be corrupt, whether it is Imran, Musharraf, Nawaz, Bush or Clinton.
The only messiah is LAW.
Law must be pre-ordained, before politicians are released on the arena, so that political corruption is minimized, within parliament, parties and politicians.
January 3rd, 2008 at 5:55 pm
KGazi..#32
I agree with your definition. My point was to indicate that our society cannopt be defined in terms of what you see in the west. We have some fundamental differences that simply does not allow to implement western style democracy. For example, do you see any army coup in the US, UK?
Anyway, our society has similarities with pre-industrial revolution era. Any type of must be done from that perspective. There are no canned formula that will work well in every situation.
January 3rd, 2008 at 7:02 pm
Jodi Kichu Mone na Koren #46,
I know in #31, you meant whether there should be a S.Asian VERSION of democracy, because of our psyche and culture.
Well, it all boils down to the basic Rules of the game. Whether we play football (soccer) in Dhaka or in Brazil, the game has to be played by the same rules, otherwise its not soccer. We cannot, say, play with ONE TEAM ONLY and call it soccer “because we S.Asians hate playing with two teams”! Thats fine, but then it becomes a COMPLETELY different game - not soccer.
In governance the basic rules of democracy also must be met - if it INTENDS to be defined as a democracy. A football can be kicked and handled in any way, and a govt can be run in any way too (S.Asian way or Brazilian way), but to be called SOCCER or DEMOCRACY, the fundamental rules have to be followed.
Army coups happen here more frequently because those crucial rules of governance (law order corruption impeachment etc) are neither practised nor defined, leading civilian governance to total anarchy, and needing army to intervene.
In S.Asia we have randomly kicked the ball of govt around, but we havent really followed the CRUCIAL rules of democracy, so we cannot even call it S.Asian “democracy”, it has been more like “S.Asian Culto-cracy”.
January 3rd, 2008 at 7:02 pm
#46 Jodi Kichu
“Do you see any army coup in the US, UK?”.. ARMY COUP is inevitable in a country where the ‘logi-boitha’ and ‘Dhan-Katar Kaste’ type fightings are exist between two political parties. Such kind of fighting’s are not exist in those countries hence none of us will be able see the ARMY COUP in US, UK.
Implementing and practising the proper law we can stop ‘logi-Kaste’ fighting as well as the ARMY COUP.
January 3rd, 2008 at 7:25 pm
Continution of my previous message.
Statistically no formula fits 100% accurately for any situation but there are some formulas which could be well fitted for our country if our leaders try to use them.
January 4th, 2008 at 1:11 am
Jyoti,
I think the genuine protest you are referring to was only emboldened during the intervention state. Where were these protest when other mindless things were happening during the last govts regime? Many BNP leaders complained they kept silent out of fear and now they can protest because of the new circumstances. So are these politicians ethically void opportunists or our democratic culture degraded to an autocratic regime – all hail supreme queen !
Sure, election in 120 days would have brought AL. What have we seen in their past to give us hope things would be any different? Last time they were in power, the common saying amongst their top leaders was since they came to power after a longtime its time to make up for lost income.
We can debate about the glitches in the reform but I highly doubt we would have an independent judiciary, ACC, PSC and other reforms reach a stage as they have now with AL in power. This has definitely helped us.
Jyoti we all know there is no alternative for democracy, but for democracy or anything for that matter to evolve for the better, I believe the fundamental ingredient is there are people with genuine good intentions in the leadership of the political party. Sadly not only was it in short supply but alarmingly crooks were traded in for better leaders. That’s why it was difficult to put faith in time & evolution of democracy in BD. Trend in evolution curve was going down.
January 4th, 2008 at 4:04 am
I’m a very mundane man, neither a politician nor a political professor nor an intellectual and so shy about to speak out my vision and module of democracy. I believe, the non-party democracy is the solution for the problems of traditonal dismal diseased democracy.
While in democratic system all the times through one election to next people practice partisanship and engage in party-wars, how the elected representatives in the house will work non-parisan way! With multiparty democractic system, fighting, fraudulence and partisanship is intimately blended with the system. The cult-leadership, blind loyalty to leaders and killings the opponents are also the product of multiparty democracy.
Why we can’t come out of cloistered thinking of this traditional democracy? I believe, instead of, multiparty representative democracy, the non-party fully-participated direct popular democracy can cure us from the default democratic grave fatal side-effects.
In our country if mayoral elections can be possible without party tickets why this model can’t be replicated for the national MP election!
We should put a serious thinking to evolve out new system of governance through non-party direct popular democracy conducted in extended period instead of one-day election to diffuse election furry and carnage.
Thanks.
January 4th, 2008 at 6:50 pm
bitterboy #51,
Your suggestion for non-party system because of frustration with “fighting, fraudulence and partisanship” does not provide the answer of HOW TO eliminate those problems.
Like in BD, people say “our traffic is a mess, so we need wider streets”. But wider streets doesnt solve the traffic MESS, it only provides a wider mess!
What is needed is DISCIPLINE on the same streets, to eliminate the mess. Rules and laws of traffic (right of way, overtaking, penalties, parking, pedestrians etc) need to be enforced, so that even narrow streets flow smoothly, and EVEN without blowing horns!
Same in our governance. Rules and Laws for the DISCIPLINE in parliament, parties and elections need to be enforced, so that governance also flows smoothly, even with multi-parties, but without the ‘fighting, fraudulence and partisanship’.
Otherwise, our political mess becomes as horrendous as our traffic mess.
January 4th, 2008 at 7:50 pm
After reading all the interesting comments here, I understand that some people still think this army backed extra-constitutional Govt will save us from “shontrash”, “durniti” and cult dynasty. The fact is that army intervened the “yesuddin” process to secure their 5000 or 10000 UN peacekeeping jobs, not to save us or our country. Right now they are trying to secure power.This is why most of the politicians and some University teachers are in jail now. This regime has messed up every sector, economy is in disarray and currently we are facing severe food crisis.If we wait another
year, more damage will be done to our country.
AL-BNP regime was better than this, atleast we knew what the “logi-boitha” and “dhan katar kaste” bahini were doing. Does anyone know how many DU students got beaten up during the student unrest, how many had a broken leg or broken hand? There is a term in bangla
” shorsher moddhe bhut”, we have “bhut” in the “shorshe” that is being used to get rid of bhuts!
However, we are not punjabis, we are bengalis and this is not Pakistan , this is Bangladesh.
During the student unrest, a street hawker told ” they think that we are idiots, but we are not idiots, they came to give us election, why don’t they give the election and leave?”
So we are not idiots and the dream of another “jolpai” takeover will not come true.
January 5th, 2008 at 1:49 am
Borsha,
You dont really think the old-school AL and BNP of pre 1/11 will “save us from “shontrash”, “durniti” and cult dynasty”, do you?
Do you honestly want to have an election right now, without any other refinements in our system, to place those SAME OLD cult politicians back in control of peoples money, just because army reminds you of Pakistan?
If you say ‘yes’ to any of those questions then you are one of the very FEW who say ‘yes’.
January 5th, 2008 at 2:57 am
KGazi, you trust the army to do a better job than cult politicians. Borsha trusts AL-BNP more than the army. Your trust may be better placed than Borsha’s. Or may be it is other way around. Time will tell. But I don’t think you can make a call that Borsha’s view is one the ‘very few’. In fact, one might argue that it is your view -that army is more likely to deliver - that is in the minority. Whatever popularity or ‘moral mandate’ the regime had a year ago, anyone connected with Bangladeshi reality will admit that the regime is not particularly popular. If there is a free election tomorrow, it is AL-BNP that most people will vote for.
Does our political system need reform? Absolutely. You think corruption and cult politics are the problems. I think it is deeper than that. I think the main problem is the winner-takes-all system. For argument’s sake, let’s say you are right - corruption and cult politics are the main problems and the army is more likely to deliver on reforms. You still can’t say that Borsha is among the very few who trusts AL-BNP more than the army.
EH, yes the regime has taken tentative steps on ACC/EC/PSC/judiciary etc. But each positive step has come with a political agenda. ACC chief has already said that his autonomy is being compromised. EC’s handling of BNP is less than neutral. The credibility of verdicts against many top politicians are in question. Forgive me if I am not as convinced of the regime’s bona fides as you (or for that matter as much as I was in January 2007).
January 5th, 2008 at 4:30 am
Jyoti, I am not just guessing that the current govt can do a better job, lets look at it from performance point, not just ‘maybe’.
To answer my 2 questions to Borsha in #54, you basically agreed with me:
1) Question 1: Has CTG done better than AL/BNP?
“yes the regime has taken tentative steps on ACC/EC/PSC/judiciary etc.” and THAT is the evidence of performance. The fact that those actions have been taken by this regime (in 1 year), which the cult regimes did not (in 15 years), and had no intention of doing. Should we still trust the cult regimes?
2) Question 2: Should we have reform now, before we have elections?
“Does our political system need reform? Absolutely.” Then we should NOT have elections right now, until those reforms have been made. Even your favorite problem “winner-takes-all” also needs reform, so that it is forbidden from politics.
Has this CTG govt SERIOUSLY talked about reforms? Yes, more in 1 year than cult politicians did in 15.
There may be some who agree with Borsha, but based on performance of CTG vs CULTS, they will be incorrect to feel that way. But based on your response, you seem to agree more with me!
January 5th, 2008 at 4:54 am
Bhai KGazi, if you choose to ignore my caveats about the CTG’s actions then what can I say?
Like many times before, let’s just agree to disagree. Hopefully by the end of this year these will be academic debates. I’ll be very happy if my scepticism proves to be ill founded and your optimism is proved right. I only hope that if the reverse should occur we’ll have your enthusiastic support in the long struggle ahead for a peaceful and prosperous Bangladesh.
January 5th, 2008 at 7:08 am
Jyoti, the essence of cults is that SOME followers fall so much in love with them, that they fail to see cults failures, or acknowledge the rivals’ success.
Hope you wont go for hartal after a happy ending, end of 2008, if my optimism is proven right
January 5th, 2008 at 7:43 am
#55,
Thanks to Jyoti for answering the questions, I cannot write things so nicely and clearly.
#54 KGazi,
answer to your question is yes, I think AL-BNP can do things better than the army. I agree with you that we need reforms. but there is no short and easy way to do that.
If election takes place today, most likely AL will come to power. This time they will be careful about “shontrash” and think twice
before supporting Godfathers like Shamim Osman and Jainal Hazari. If BNP faces defeat, they will also think seriously about the “hawa bhavan” centered durnity.
Army backed CTG is trying to do reforms with their minus 2 formula. Initially they tried to send them to other countries, because of the strong reaction from the media this plan was not successful. Then they filed the cases against these 2 leaders. If SH and KZ are accused of corruption, why did they force them to leave the country? DO you think this is the right way to fight against corruption? How come General Ershad and Khaleda Zia’s brother are out of jail? Why DU teachers are
having “discussion” with DGFI? Tarek Zia’s “interrogation” CD were available in the market? who leaked these information?why did not we get the same in case of the DU and RU teachers?
I do not belong to the very few minority,
and I am not the only person who is seeing the shadow of pakistan. Look at the recent editorials and articles from our newspapers.
many people are afraid of the same.
I am actually representing the majority, let me tell you how.
all the hawkers and slum dwellers are on my side. people who used to work in RANGS bhavan are on my side. Students were beaten and farmers did not get fertilizers. they will also support me. people who work in media, reporters and journalists will support me beacuse media is not free right now.Lastly, all the people of Bangladesh who wants to eat rice twice a day, are on my side. so I am on the majority.
If you plant a tree today, you cannot get the fruit tomorrow. You have to take proper care of it and wait for some years. Army has already done much damage to that tree.
we should not allow them to do more.
January 5th, 2008 at 8:15 am
Jyoti,
I think we have diferent views and lets leave it to that with the hope future holds good for BD.
One correction on your note, ‘ACC chief has already said that his autonomy is being compromised’ - On the contrary ACC chief has said if his work is intefered with, we would not have seen him working till now.
January 5th, 2008 at 8:24 am
KGazi, I’m not for hartal even if you’re proved wrong. If you’re proved right, I’ll invite you to a round of daal-bhaat-aloo bharta-kacha maris.:)
EH, let’s agree to disagree then. Here’s to a better Bangladesh regardless.
January 5th, 2008 at 1:53 pm
#59 Borsha
1. AL-BNP regime was better than this, atleast we knew what the “logi-boitha” and “dhan katar kaste” bahini were doing……….Yes we knew what they were doing. Involving in fighting with each other, political prostitution, conspiracy, corruption, lying and cheating with the people etc. What message do you think people get by knowing all these information’s about our leaders? If you think people will choose an honest candidate by casting their vote in the next election then I must say you are living in a foolish world. People only learn how to become a big thief, liar, cheater and conspirator as the cult leaders are the icon to them.
2. Answer to your question is yes, I think AL-BNP can do things better than the army………..You are not kidding, are you? From what aspect they can do things better? Things were never better in BD in terms politics, economy and law and order. Things have been worsening in BD since Ershad era and neither cult nor our autocratic leaders were bothered to fix them. Only the present army back CTG who has taken the bold initiatives to fix our messy system which they have already proved by reforming ACC/EC/PSC/ Judiciary. If you choose to find conspiracy in their honest effort no one will be able to convince you in anyway not even the GOD him/herself.
3. This time they will be careful about “shontrash” and think twice…………Is not the same way people thought when they voted BNP in 1991, AL in 1996 and BNP in 2001? What were the outcomes of those three terms? Jei Lao shei kodu. Both AL and BNP are the flip side of the coin. Our politicians will never change their mentality and same old style corruption, shojon-priti unless they are forced to do so by implementing strict law and only present army backed government can do that.
4. If you plant a tree today, you cannot get the fruit tomorrow. You have to take proper care of it and wait for some years………….Yes you are right. The trees are planted by army backed CTG by reforming the ACC/EC/PSC/Independent Judiciary which are the fundamental steps to establish a true democracy in a country (Emran Khan also mentioned about independence of Judiciary in his interview with Mr. A. Saleh) but unfortunately some of us expecting fruit from these trees in just one year. Our beloved cult rulers did not even bother to plant a single tree of democracy during their periods let alone the fruit.
5. Army has already done much damage to that tree…..Could you please explain which tree are you referring here and exactly what damage they have done to that tree in just one year?
January 5th, 2008 at 6:27 pm
Borsha, For 15 years 1991 to 2006, BD was a land of anarchy, where shontrash and corruption ruled. That decay cannot be repaired by CTG in 1 year, BUT they are making better effort and progress than in past 36 years, which will lead to better system of governance. This govt is TRYING to enforce law and order, where previously it was “mogher mulluk”.
When CONTROL is setup for law and order, a lot of illegal hawkers, rickshas, slum dwellers, criminals and mastans will be effected. They will be uprooted and their business disrupted.
This CTG CONTROL against crime and coruption, will become unpopular with mastans, corrupt dealers, hooligans and criminals, and there is no shortage of them in Bangladesh, because previous govts gave them license to exist and grow.
While such criminal license may help illegal business and mastans, it is disastrous for the innocent mass of 150 million, and catastrophic for devt of the nation.
Since you agree that we need reform, then why not give this govt a chance to create reform? Bring on the reform suggestions.
If there is an election now, corrupt criminals will vote against this CTG with both hands. But the question is - do we want such an election? Do we want crime and corruption to rule our elections and govt, or do we want to govt to rule against crime and corruption?
Jyoti - no matter how much we debate, our basic mindset will remain unchanged, each of us - Borsha, you and I, will still hold on to our current leaning.
So, instead of waiting till 2009, I am ready for dal-bhaat right now!
January 5th, 2008 at 10:09 pm
Beyond the Apparent One Year of Emergency Rule, from newagebd
http://www.newagebd.com/oped.html
January 6th, 2008 at 12:11 am
Not so fast KGazi. Since we won’t change our mind, let’s wait for the events to unfold. Tell you what, if by the end of the year General Moeen U Ahmed is not the president or PM (or running for those offices), you’ll have your daal-bhaat.
January 6th, 2008 at 2:20 am
bd watcher #62
During AL-BNP regime, media was free, so we knew about their “shontrash” and “durnity”. If media were not free at that time, you would not have known about their criminal activities and right now you would be all praise for AL-BNP regime, just like you are supporting this CTG.
I am not living in fool’s paradise, paradise is a nice place where you don’t have to worry about anything, I am actually sensing grave danger for our country. BNP-AL were corrupt, no doubt about it. when military get involved in corruption, they do it in much more systematic and sophisticated way. talk to anyone in BD who is working in telecom sector. you will know who is making money out of VOIP.
“Things were never better in BD in terms politics, economy and law and order. Things have been worsening in BD since Ershad era and neither …..”
even with so much corruption , economy was better in 2006 than it is now.Political activity is banned now, so there is no question of getting better and worse.If you think that absence of political activity means we have better political atmosphere, then I have nothing to say. If things started to worsen since Ershad era, then you are admitting that we had better Govt before,formed by AL or BNP. As you have mentioned Ershad, I should remind you that Ershad also started his regime declaring zihad against corruption.But ultimately “things started to worsen… ”
“What were the outcomes of those three terms? Jei Lao shei kodu.”
It was not “jei lau shie kodu”. During BNP’s first tenure, there was fertilizer crisis and it was a major issue, when AL came in ‘96, they did a good job in agriculture sector but law and order was a mess.During BNP’s last regime they tried to improve it by forming RAB and “crossfire”. Because of the strong public outcry, ultimately they had to arrest bangla bhai.
“If you choose to find conspiracy in their honest effort no one will be able to convince …”
honest effort to save the peacekeeping jobs,
It was a puppet Govt under Iajuddin from the very beginning, this is why some advisors also resigned, why did not they interven then? their eyes opened only after getting the warning from UN.
“The trees are planted by army backed CTG …”
looks like you and I are talking about 2 different tree. I am talking about the tree that was planted in 1991, not in 1/11.this tree is facing all kinds of attack right now, flood, draught, insects…
As you have read the article about Imran Khan,
you probably also read that Mr Khan was actually living in fool’s paradise as he considered Musharraf as the messiah, later he came to realize the real intention behind the drive against corruption by ISI and Musharraf.
KGazi #63
“When CONTROL is setup for law and order, a lot of illegal hawkers, rickshas, slum dwellers, criminals and …..”
Do you seriously believe that Hawkers rikshawalahs, slum dwellers are “illegal”? They were born poor, state could not provide them education, so they are “illegal” and don’t have any right to live in Dhaka? Do you know who the slum dwellers are? they are garment workers, earning the major part of the national revenuw for 150 million people.
“If there is an election now, corrupt criminals will vote against this CTG with both hands.”
As far as I know, 80% people of Bangladesh are poor, mainly peasants, they don’t have any access to do “corruption”. I did not know that CTG is going to participate in the election. what’s name of their party, is it “JAGO BANGLADESH”?
However, CTG has done one reform successfully.
I give them all credit for that. previously, people had “AL vs BNP” arguements, now it has become CTG vs AL-BNP.
January 6th, 2008 at 3:32 am
Jyoti - Unlike our political system, dal-bhaat needs no reform, and therefore no delay.
On the issue of Moeen running for President, I am against the idea of giving people automatic succession if their past leadership have been a failure.
Because thats how incompetence is bred and propagated.
Moeen said he wont stand, but if he proves to be a successful leader by the end of the year, achieves the goals of the nation for reform and democracy, and since Bangladesh has a deficiency in PROVEN leadership, should we still deny him that post?
January 6th, 2008 at 5:47 pm
#66 Brosha:
Refer to the last para, a powerful group is ultimately trying to frame the equation as:
CTG (Army) vs. People of bangladesh.
The ultimate goal is to prove bangladesh as a fail state and become a part of India. So, the current situation is not as simple as it looks.
January 6th, 2008 at 8:08 pm
Borsha
This tree is facing all kinds of attack right now, flood, draught, insects………….Do you mean that the present govt performances are the causes of recent natural disasters!!!! or they are cursed by the natural disaster!!! This kind of statement only proves how rationally some of us are thinking about the present CTG’s performance.
Frm 19982 to 2006 both Ershad and BNP-AL leaders had the decent amount of time to bring the significant change in BD’s system which none of the government had before 1982. Hence the mentioning of the Ershad era.
Just wondering how much relevant the Army’s peace keeping job with the current regime’s performances?
January 7th, 2008 at 12:41 am
#68 jodi Kichu Mone na Koren
who are this powerful group? why do they think that “corrupt” BNP-AL represent people of Bangladesh? According to some comments here , current CTG is working hard and making all these reforms so that we can get rid of corrupt politicians of AL-BNP, so the equation can also be framed as
CTG(people of Bangladesh) vs AL-BNP
A foreign power cannot invade another country if that country has people’s representatives in the GOVT.Also, India is a democracy, their Govt will think seriously about public reaction before making any decision of making BD a part of india.
bd watcher #69
I did not mean that we are having the natural disasters because of a military backed GOVT!! Many actions of the CTG are direct attack on democracy.Minus 2 formula, absence of freedom of speech, attack on students and teachers,systematic takeover of many Govt institutes by army personnel, all these are attack on democracy.
“Just wondering how much relevant the Army’s peace keeping job with the current regime’s performances?”
The Wall Street Journal has given a graphic description of the event of the emergency proclamation. It reported on June 4, 2007:
‘Indeed, until the very last moment, Bangladeshi generals seemed reluctant to strike. Trying to be seen as a benign, enlightened force after democracy was restored [1991], the army has focused on helping the United Nations maintain peace and organise free elections in the world’s trouble spots. Nearly 10,000 Bangladeshi soldiers are deployed today under UN command in Lebanon, Congo, Ivory Coast and elsewhere, an arrangement that lets them earn more during a year on UN payroll than in a lifetime at home.
‘Following extensive consultations with the US and other Western nations, which by then had denounced the upcoming election as unfair and pulled out observers, the UN on Jan 11 took action. In a formal statement released in Dhaka, the most senior UN official in Bangladesh, Renata Lok Dessallien, cautioned that the scheduled election “would not be considered credible or legitimate.” Because of this, her statement warned, there may be “implications” for the Bangladesh army’s future participation in UN peacekeeping should the election be allowed to take place.
‘Before the day was over, a delegation of Bangladesh generals led by the chief of staff, Gen Moeen, walked into the office of the country’s president, a supporter of Ms Khaleda, with the UN statement in hand, according to senior officers. They demanded that the Jan 22 election be cancelled and that power be transferred to a new caretaker administration hand-picked by the army. The army by then had disconnected the land line and cellular phones of Ms Khaleda and her top aides. The president complied.
‘In a statement released shortly thereafter, the United States government noted that it has been urging Ms Khaleda’s and Ms Hasina’s parties “to engage in dialogue to resolve their differences, and to refrain from violence” –– and added that the Bangladeshi authorities “felt compelled to declare a state of emergency.” A US official has said that, while the US government did not “actively” seek a coup, it felt “relief” that a catastrophe had been averted. Ms Dessallien of the UN has declined to comment on the record about her role in these events.’
January 7th, 2008 at 7:53 pm
#70: Borsha
Do you really believe in your equation? In reply to bd watcher, you clearly mentioned the event and still think that the equation is people vs. al-bnp????
Very self-contradictory statement, indeed!
January 8th, 2008 at 7:22 pm
#71 Jodi Kichu Mone na Koren ,
Before branding me as “self-condradictory”,
please read my comments carefully, I did not say I believe in that equation. Some people think that only this CTG can do anything good for Bangladesh, according to them, CTG represents people of Bangladesh. So the equation framed by the “powerful” group can be interpreted in a different way.
you did not answer my question, Let me ask you again? who are this powerful group? One powerful group is currently framing a equation with minus 2 formula. Are they same?