National Security Council Is Coming
Hassan Ariff says NSC is coming. We are approaching end times
National Security Council will be formed: Hassan Ariff
Thu, Mar 20th, 2008 8:31 pm BdST
Dhaka, March 20 (bdnews24.com) – The caretaker administration is considering forming a National Security Council to tackle law and order issues and national disasters, law adviser AF Hassan Ariff said Thursday. Potential members of the council include the president, the prime minister, the leader of the opposition and representatives of the armed forces, the adviser told reporters in his land ministry office. Ariff, who is also land adviser, failed to say when the national security council might come into being. “The matter is being discussed. No draft proposal on the formation of such a council has reached the law ministry or the cabinet from the home ministry,” said Ariff. The adviser, however, confirmed the Truth Commission would be formed in a month: “It seems that the Anticorruption Commission does not have any reservations about it.” The Truth Commission, also known as the ‘accountability commission’, is intended to facilitate legal investigations and trials. bdnews24.com/ahd/ehb/my/am/2000 hours
March 21st, 2008 at 6:23 am
And, it will also die like its predecessor, however, this time it will leave behind a trail of devastation in the process.
March 21st, 2008 at 2:23 pm
Published in DS
Star Wars and Bangladesh
Jyoti Rahman
A long time ago in a galaxy far, far away…
Thus begins Star Wars, one of the highest grossing movie series in history that also provide powerful insights into political economy, insights that have tremendous relevance to our own time in a country very, very close to our hearts. “No” to a bureaucratic state or any council with extraordinary powers, “yes” to a decentralised democratic republic — that’s what we learn from Star Wars, and they apply very much to today’s Bangladesh.
Before proceeding, let’s remind ourselves about the series.
In the Galactic Republic where the series is set, the Jedi held supervisory powers over the affairs of the state. They were well-versed in the use of the Force, which they applied for only benevolent purposes. Sith could also use the Force, but they did so for diabolical ends.
In the beginning of the series, politicians were beholden to sectoral and vested interests, and it was the bureaucrats who really governed. The elected politicians’ selfish and self-serving actions led to political crises and civil war which concluded with a Chancellor — who was also a Sith lord — ending the Republic and establishing the Empire.
The Empire promised order and stability, but it denied liberty. Societies that trade off liberty for stability soon realise they have neither, and so it was with the Galaxy. Soon a resistance developed, and to quell this resistance the Empire built the Death Star — a weapon so powerful it could destroy an entire planet. But the Rebel Alliance succeeded in defeating the Emperor by the end of the series.
So, what are the lessons for today’s Bangladesh?
Let us begin with the Jedi Council, the guardians of peace. Politicians are susceptible to corruption and vested interest, and we need them to be guided by wise elders, like the Jedi Council. Do we need a similar council in the post-Emergency Bangladesh?
Let’s think about the Jedi Council for a moment. The Jedi exercised extraordinary powers, operating outside the executive, legislative and the judiciary arms of the state — they were a state within the state, they were a law unto themselves. They were an exclusivist organisation with strictly restricted entry. They were openly contemptuous of the elected politicians. They claimed to live by their code, but there were no external checks and balances. Considering how easily the evil Sith lord manipulated key Jedis, their code was not much of a substitute for institutional accountability.
Suppose we set up a similar council composed of people belonging to an organisation with rigorously restricted entry, an organisation that faces no effective checks, and whose members are openly contemptuous of the elected politicians — who is to say that this council will not meet the same fate as the Jedi Council?
The Jedi Council could not prevent the end of the Republic. But was the Republic worth saving to begin with?
Well, the sheer size of a massive state that the Galactic Republic brought about its own downfall. The lesson here is that the larger the state, relatively larger the bureaucracy. A large bureaucracy is bad news for representative government. We hear about corrupt politicians all the time, and we know that corruption thrives in bureaucratic maze. If we are serious about curbing corruption, we need to look beyond arresting politicians and trim the bureaucratic fat, tear up the red tape and increase transparency in decision-making.
Moreover, the Jedi, or the Sith, for all their power to see the future, could not prevent their demise. The lesson here is that no government planning agency is likely to be able to plan efficiently for the future — central planning just does not work. And if it is tried, even with the best of intentions, it begins a road that ends in serfdom. In Bangladesh, we need to be wary of people who claim that they have the secret to a golden future.
The Empire was of course not the solution. If the Empire had been indeed popular and in a world where people only cared about the inter-galactic commuting services running on time, the Emperor and his minions would not have needed the Death Star to terrify the Galaxy. And similarly in today’s Bangladesh, we need to be wary of the rule by decree, for this will inevitably draw resistance in the campuses or factories or fertiliser distribution centres.
If neither the Republic nor the Empire, then what?
The Galaxy’s best hope appeared to be in free systems uncontrolled by the extraordinary powers of the Jedi or the Sith, under government of the people, by the people for the people. And that appears to be the case for Bangladesh too.
Say “no” to the Jedi Council or a bureaucratic state, and “yes” to decentralised and democratic politics.
Jyoti Rahman is a movie buff and member of the Drishtipat Writers’ Collective.
March 22nd, 2008 at 4:52 am
Given the statement by the Law Advisor about the proposed National Security Council, it seems Bangladesh is heading for a goverment by committee. And what a committee, seemingly inherently flawed in both structure and function.
According to the report above, the council is to consist of “the president, the prime minister, the leader of the opposition and representatives of the armed forces,” with the ‘representatives’ presumably the three chiefs of the armed services. But how can we have a prime minister and the leader of the opposition in the council unless we have elections? Even the current president is a political appointee, being kept in office at the pleasure of the CTG, partly because it would be a bigger pain to remove him than keep him where he is. So the council then effectively will be run by the armed services chiefs or suchlike as long as elections are not held, with presumably the Chief Advisor and some handpicked persons serving in for the absent ‘prime minister’ and ‘leader of the opposition’ - though how the latter post is to be filled will take some mind-boggling spin and sophistry. At best we’ll be getting our version of a soft Big Brother state, at the helm of national affairs, in effect an unelected, righteous, patriarchal trumvirate who show no inclination to even hold a referendum on the issue. Where will their mandate come from? Where is it in the constitution?
Then, even if, say, this body continues to function until elections are held, and the prime minister and the leader of the opposition then take their rightful seats in the body, one has to note that the prime minister, by virtue of her/his powers, will thereby automatically be the first among equals. In a parliamentary system, in a civilian government, all other members are automatically subordinate to the prime minister, that is, unless the constitution is radically revised to hold the PM’s office in check, but which then would nullify the very principles on which the parliamentary system is founded. And what safeguards are there to prevent abuse by the PM, to maneuver to put in place her/his wo/men to the other posts (the armed service chiefs appointments and service extensions, for example, are in the PM’s hot little hands), and for the leader of the opposition to do what they always do, boycott meetings? Also, there are no ‘natural’ checks and balances being contemplated in the council in terms of broadening its membership to include human rights activists or the chief justice or other citizens. This is going to be a closed body, its deliberations, its processes not open to a public on whose behalf it is being formed.
Furthermore, its function in relation to ‘law and order’ issues is too amorphous and vague. All too frequently, ‘law and order’ issues in Bangladesh mean political issues, and attempts to impose ‘law and order’ become barely concealed mechanisms with which to impose, and keep in place, a particular political order or coterie. If there are is an elected government with a political party coming to power, the iron law of politics dictates that party will pursue policies designed to make its stay in power as long as possible. That will mean one of two things: either the national security council will have to knuckle down to the imperatives of the presiding party in power, or else the neutral pursuit of its functions will give rise to conflict since politicians and the army have always conflicting notions about what constitutes ‘law and order’. In this scenario, given our dismal history in this regard, it will then become yet another arena of in-fights, and mutual recriminations. Either way it will become toothless and ineffective.
Which brings us to the very real possibility that the elections will have to be engineered so as to prevent the rise, or victory, of a political party in the elections that will cause trouble in this regard. The best means to ensure this outcome is to have a ‘compliant’ party, a civilian frontman, behind which the kingmakers will pull the strings. There realistically seems to be no other way the council can function as envisaged.
Maybe it’ll be all for the best. Maybe a country gets the council and state it deserves! Maybe we the citizens of Bangladesh are children and need to be kept firmly in hand.
March 22nd, 2008 at 10:54 am
Also read…”Say no to NSC”
http://www.drishtipat.org/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/02/nsc_final.pdf
March 24th, 2008 at 10:55 am
Five dangers of National Security Council is published at today’s DS
http://www.thedailystar.net/story.php?nid=28945
March 24th, 2008 at 8:05 pm
Points made in the D* article (#5) are severe and extremely worrisome.
Instead of just shooting down the NSC, can anyone suggest **anything** constructive that is (a) a way forward and (b) is practical+possible (i.e. allows current power brokers to exit safely - otherwise they won’t and it’s not a practical solution) and (c) also sets up reasonable safeguards against a repeat of 1/11?
I am not a regular blogosphere reader, nor am I as avid a follower of Bangladeshi media/political affairs as many on this blog - so please - if there is anything constructive out there that I have missed, direct me appropriately.
Below is what I have found in my sporadic reading that has been somewhat constructive - I list the links here to avoid repetition.
Asif’s “one way out”: http://www.drishtipat.org/blog/2007/11/14/one-way-out/
[though we may be beyond the solutions suggested by now]
tacit, asif, and jyoti’s comments:(http://www.drishtipat.org/blog/2008/02/05/irene-bd-trip/ comment #15, #16, #34 in particular)
March 24th, 2008 at 10:55 pm
hijibijbij,
One of Jyoti’s upcoming pieces for April Forum focuses on that aspect — how to get the check and balance in the government without having an imperial presidency or National Security Council. I’d let Jyoti talk more about it.
Rice Price Up –> popularity of CTG down.
As the popularity of the current regime goes down with the rise of each take of rice price, the CTG is losing more and more BATNA (best alternative to a negotiated agreement ) on the negotiating table.
Each time the army chief goes to market to check the food price, or on state visits, the current govt’s intention towards a peaceful and fair handover becomes suspect. A general who is supposed to retire and go into oblivion in a year will simply not do such things, if he didn’t have long term ambition.
So it seems increasingly likely that we are heading for a not-so-peaceful finish. Perhaps the only hope rests with the shonglap next month between the parties and the CTG.