Modesty Nowhere

M. Tawsif Salam

13 June, 2009. Dhaka

The following day of Bangladesh’s humiliating defeat to Ireland in ICC T20 World Cup, was my first day at the new campus of North South University. We had no idea about how much time it would take to reach the new campus so we were pretty early from home. On the way while crossing American Embassy, my friend Saikat who I was riding with, and me, for sake of keeping on exuberance of the new campus, made a deal that throughout the time we will avoid any discussion not only on Bangladesh Cricket team but also of T20 World Cup. Both of us rather we found hundreds like us in the campus later who abode by this deal.

“…Actually he ain’t to be blamed because he didn’t learn to act with modesty; not when it’s a humiliation, and not on earth whiles its celebrations…”

It’s undeniable that there were definite reasons for Bangladeshi cricket fans refusing talks on the team’s humiliating incompetence in T20 World Cup. Bangladesh played two matches where the players will like to put result against India as an important factor to their defence against the anticipated probe over their tournament performance.

Today, one of the selector, I missed his name, was talking to a private FM radio station and was desperately defending the national team. He said the disappointment of the fans was indeed their tendency to get upset with just the result of a certain match. This brilliant selector and sounds-like-a-wise-guy told that Bangladesh cricket fans will have to reform their attitude over performances of their team. I mean this is absolutely ridiculous that a national cricket team selector talks like that rather after ridiculous performances of the team which he appears to have co-selected. He could have talked like that if there were plenty of contrasts between the result and the overall game-play of his team.

In matches against India and Ireland, runs scored by the lower order were respectably 50 and 54, that is what ultimately the score got built on was the lower order’s scuffling with their bats. More importantly, the top order in both the matches collapsed before the 9th overs could be bowled. Two middle order batsmen had excellent ties between them that in both matches they made same scores, respectably 8 and 7. The overall middle-order batting scores are already enough to think of a probe, they were 34 and 35 respectably. Because how important a full-fit and performing middle order is in T20s, I hope all the selectors and players will undisputedly admit.

“…the captain who did bat not more than 23 deliveries and scored not more than 25 runs in the entire international T20 competition, has told the team performances was not as poor as words appear to have been spread on it…” © Getty Images

So it’s not that throughout the games Bangladeshi players saturated with good cricket and tragedies suddenly came. Both the games had their 10th overs of the second innings where everyone was able to say Bangladesh’s not going to make it. So what our players and selectors have to be is a little modest while talking to anybody. The one gets upset, gets upset because that ‘one’ indeed does care. Players beef up the spirits with this ‘care’ so the players will have to be modest when they turn the ‘carers’ upset. Asking for reforms in attitudes is not the way.

Same words are for our mighty captain Mohammad Ashraful, who, covered by Armed Police Battalion personnels, yards away of people’s outrage and fed with assurance that there have been arrangements to keep him away of the mob, has proudly pronounced that point of his stepping down from captaincy doesn’t really arise. Mohammad Ashraful, the captain who did bat not more than 23 deliveries and scored not more than 25 runs in the entire international T20 competition, has told the team performances was not as poor as words are spread on it, rather they have plenty of achievements from this competition. Actually he ain’t to be blamed because he didn’t learn to act with modesty; not when it’s a humiliation, and not on earth whiles its celebrations.

President Ziaur Rahman (1936-1981): In Memoriam

Rumi Ahmed
USA

I hear… of your recent saying that both the Army and the Government needed a Dictator. Only those generals who gain success can set up military dictatorships. What I now ask of you is military success, and I will risk the dictatorship.”

- Abraham Lincoln, message to General Joseph Hooker, Army of the Potomac

May 30 is the 28th anniversary of President Ziaur Rahman’s death. It came approximately 10 years and 2 months after he gave a radio announcement, from Chittagong, declaring the Independence of Bangladesh on behalf of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, then in the custody of the Pakistani Army.

During our Independence War, he was Sector Commander over much of today’s Chittagong Division, and commander of Bangladesh Army’s ‘Z” brigade. At the end of the war, with Pakistani forces crumbling before the assault of joint Indo-Bangladeshi forces and surrendering on 16 December 1971, he was awarded the Bir Uttom.

At the onset of independence, Zia became one of the senior-most officers of the Bangladesh Army. His performance during the nine-month war and his radio announcement at the onset of the war marked him as different from his fellow officers. He was made Brigade Commander of Comilla, close to where his force had done most of the fighting during the war.

The Government brought him to Dhaka in June 1972 and made him Deputy Chief of Staff, under Major General Shafiullah, who commanded the “S” Brigade during the Independence War. It is as Deputy CoS that he moved into the 6 Shahid Moinul Road residence, where he would live the rest of his life. It is from this post that he observed the imposition of one-party dictatorship in Bangladesh when Sheikh Mujib, by a constitutional amendment, made Bangladesh a one-party state, banned all other political parties, all but four newspapers, and named himself President.

After the brutal assassination of Sheikh Mujib and most of the members of his family by a group of army officers, Zia was elevated to Chief of Staff but placed under Major General Khalilur Rahman, who was made Chief of Defense Staff. The regime, after killing Mujib’s four most-trusted political lieutenants, heroes in their own right, planned to send Zia abroad, as it sent Shafiullah. However, before that could transpire, the murderers were toppled by a counter-coup led by Brig. Khaled Musharraf, Chief of General Staff, one the most valiant leaders in our Independence War. Zia was placed under house-arrest. He was then freed by a counter-counter-coup by Col. (rt) Abu Taher, fellow Sector Commander, and leader of the banned Jatiyo Samajtrantik Dal (National Socialist Party). The counter-coup also tragically resulted in Brig. Mosharraf’s death.

Shafiullah, Zia, Mosharraf, and Taher were all awarded the Bir Uttom, the highest gallantry decoration awarded to living participants. Under normal circumstances, they should, by all right, have been able to look forward to long careers in our defense forces, promotions to command rank, and eventual retirement with the whole-hearted blessings of a grateful nation. Instead, Shafiullah was abroad, Mosharraf was dead, and Taher advoced a left-leaning revolutionary state. With the adoption of one-party statehood by the Parliament, the Awami League, until then Bangladesh’s pre-eminent political party, had also been disbanded. Zia found himself with no credible political establishment to hand over power to, a faction-ridden armed forces that was more dangerous to Bangladeshis than to foreign enemies, and an economy on the brink of collapse.

His subsequent actions, becoming Chief Martial Law Administrator, founding BNP (Bangladesh Nationalist Party), introducing multi-party democracy, allowing the publication of newspapers, holding parliamentary elections (in which Awami League became the largest opposition party in parliament), trying to revitalize the country’s industrial sector, and adopting a muscular foreign policy, were the attempts of an imperfect man to try and make the best of an imperfect situation. He survived eighteen coup attempts, before being killed by the nineteenth one, in his beloved Chittagong, the scene of his life’s greatest hour, where he had come to resolve inter-party factions in his young BNP. Bangladehis from all walks of life poured into his funeral prayer service, making it the single largest such gathering in Bangladesh’s history.

I cannot know, but I imagine he must have been a little tired by the end of his life. If the last thought that flashed through his mind was his young widow and the two little boys he left behind; maybe, after death, he found the peace he had been denied in life. The generation which should have together led Bangladesh, together turn old and hale and watched their children grow up in a free country as free men and women, and in the twilight of their lives accepted our accolades as Bangladesh’s greatest generation, had together torn each other apart. His would be the last life to be lost in that decade-long bloodbath, but by the sacrifice of his own life, he would bring the killing to an end; all subsequent transfers of power in our country would be bloodless, if not voluntary.

Testimony is paid to Zia, throughout the year, by Awami League leaders who slander and villify him every chance they get. They try to tear down the man who allowed them to re-form, and graciously accepted their leader’s return from exile in India. His statues are broken down, and bridges leading to his memorial in Dhaka, beside the National Parliament, are mysteriously removed under the cover of night. All debates about the fate of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, his great predecessor, inevitably contain someone viciously belittling him.

Yet, the idea of Zia remains. Our only head of state to have actively fought the Pakistanis in a field of battle, today he sleeps the well-deserved sleep of those who have fought the good fight. It remains to us to do our best in the imperfect world he left for us.

*****

Rumi Ahmed is a blogger from United States.

BDR Revolt : A Deadly Strategic Game Plan

Shah Mohammed Saifuddin

Since the independence, Bangladesh Rifles, the first line of defense, have been combating smuggling, human trafficking, drug trafficking and other illegal activities along the border and have made supreme sacrifices to protect the lives and properties of the people from enemy invasion with great courage and valor. Bangladesh Rifles have earned worldwide recognition for its determination, patriotism, and professionalism when they successfully repelled a large invasion by Indian border security force at Roumari point in 2001.

Despite its performance and patriotism, the members of Bangladesh Rifles got little attention from successive governments to alleviate the problem of poor pay and benefit structures allowed for them. Nevertheless, they continued to discharge their duties with utmost sincerity and took part in all nation building activities maintaining professionalism and discipline.

On 25th Feb, 2009, the nation was shocked at the news that some BDR members had revolted and killed many officers who were on deputation from Bangladesh army to protest against poor pay and benefit structures and alleged corruption by the late Director General.

The mutineers asked the government to implement a set of demands on a priority basis to address the problems of the members of Bangladesh Rifles. Some of these demands are as follows:

1. withdrawing army officers from all command posts of BDR and recruiting new officers from BCS cadres
2. allowing full rationing for BDR members
3. sending BDR personnel to U.N. peacekeeping missions
4. revamping salary structures and promotion procedures
5. allowing defense allowances for BDR members
6. procuring more transportation vehicles to guard the long porous border with India and Myanmar
7. increasing the quality of food and
8. improving educational and medical facilities for the family members of soldiers

Because of defense strategy and lack of manpower, it will not be possible to withdraw army officers from the command posts of BDR, but the rest of the demands deserve due consideration because these are logical and should have been given to the BDR members a long time ago for they put their lives in danger to safeguard the frontiers of the country. It is, therefore, hoped that the government will take appropriate measures to remove the grievances of BDR members to stop the occurrences of similar incidents in the future.

Now, let us examine whether there are any political motivations behind this unfortunate incident that shocked the entire nation.

The revolt: actors involved, motivations and methods employed

The relationship between Awami League and the defense forces of the country has never been cordial because of latter’s security outlook that anticipates no security threat from India and considers defense expenditures needless. A few clauses of the 25 year friendship treaty that virtually eliminated Bangladesh’s sovereign right to seek assistance from other friendly nations to expand and modernize its armed forces and the subsequent step motherly attitude of the government and the formation of Rakkhi Bahini had cerated widespread resentment among the army officers. Instead of taking appropriate measures to remove the legitimate grievances of the army officers, the then government continued with their suppressive and discriminatory policies to neglect, humiliate and alienate the armed forces, which ultimately led to the assassination of Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman along with most of his family members at the hands of a few young army officers.

Awami League has never forgotten the incident nor forgiven the armed forces for the assassination of Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman and left no stone unturned to avenge the incident in 1975 by creating divisions in the armed forces through various political machinations.

The comments of LGRD minister after the BDR mutiny is a testament to the fact that his party still holds grudges against the army for the death of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman and other four prominent leaders of Awami League in 1975 at the hands of a section of army officers. He said, “If the trial of Bangabandhu and four national leaders killing cases were held in time and the offender were brought into justice, the Pilkhana tragedy was not take place” (Feb, 28, 2009, The Daily Star). Does it not show the deep resentment of the current government against the army for the incidents in 1975?

After the political change in 1/11, the military backed government had thrown many Awami League leaders into jail for their alleged involvement in financial scandal and abuse of power, which, many believe, has caused further deterioration in the relationship between the armed forces and Awami League. After the elections, Awami League’s virulent verbal attack on the army for its role in 1/11 is a testament to the fact that they wanted to weaken the army so that the latter could never repeat a 1/11 like situation to bring about political changes in the country.

India has its own agenda to diminish our defense capability because it needs a subservient military in Bangladesh to easily establish total domination on 4096 km Indo-Bangla border and use our defense and intelligence resources to its advantage to quell ongoing insurgencies in its North East region. India’s abortive misadventure inside Bangladesh territory in 2001 forced them to reorganize their security policy vis a vis Bangladesh and emphasize the need to search for new avenues to play larger role in the matters related to defense of Bangladesh and neutralize Chinese influence on our defense forces. But this could only be accomplished through active cooperation from a friendly government in Bangladesh to create tension within our defense forces to break their morale and make it imperative for Bangladesh to seek Indian help in reorganizing the defense system.

So, the BDR mutiny may be the case of a teamwork between a foreign external intelligence agency and some political elements within the country to set the stage for the departure of the army officers from Bangladesh Rifles to weaken it and to tarnish the image of the army before the whole nation to break their morale.

The assertion that some local political elements and India are working together to weaken the security systems of Bangladesh may be true because the government’s quick decision to grant general amnesty to all rebellious members of Bangladesh Rifles without assessing the ground reality and to not allow any military action to quell the rebellion, which gave the mutineers enough time to put forth a set of demands and flee in groups from the BDR headquarters seems to be a preplanned strategy to instigate a rebellion, break the chain of command, kill large number of officers, and to ensure safe exit for the mutineers.

If the local and foreign conspirators who planned, directed, and implemented the rebellion are not identified and the rebellious members of BDR who broke the chain command are not brought to justice such occurrences of rebellion may be repeated in other security forces to destabilize the entire nation and create a situation for external powers to intervene in the name of peacekeeping.

Findings of the army report

The army formed its own 20 member probe committee on 2nd March, led by Lt. General Jahangir Alam Chowdhury, to investigate into the gruesome murder of army officers by the rebels at BDR headquarters on 25th Feb, 2009 and this probe committee acted separately from the committee formed by the government to investigate into the same matter. After investigating for more than two months, the committee has made the summary of their report public for the sake of transparency of their work. The army report published in various newspapers identified the following reasons for the BDR mutiny:

1. Wrong impression about the facilities of the army
2. Lack of transparency in establishing and running BDR shops
3. Delay in payment of duty allowances for the 2008 national elections
4. Misunderstanding about lease and contracts of different works in the BDR headquarters
5. Wrong impression about the BDR’s director general Shakil Ahmed, and his wife Nazneen Shakil and Dhaka sector commander Mujibul Haque’s alleged in irregularities
6. Delay made by the Home and Finance ministries in resolving BDR problems

The army report on BDR mutiny did not find any convincing evidence of any direct or indirect militant links simply because of the fact that the extremists did not have the elaborate network and manpower to plan and execute a mission deep inside the military establishment of Bangladesh with a pinpoint accuracy to kill almost 15% officers of Bangladesh army within the space of 24 hours as the previous democratically elected government had already dismantled the countrywide terror network of JMB, the most powerful extremist group in the country and executed its top masterminds as part of continuous effort to fight terrorists for which Bangladesh has partnered with international community and received high praise from across the world.

Criticism of the army report

In investigating such a complex and dangerous incident that paralyzed the entire defense system of the country, the investigators should have proper authority to contact, interrogate, and collect information from people who had direct or indirect contacts with the rebels before and after the mutiny to explore local and external linkages. They also should have followed a similar structured method described below to accomplish the investigation process:

1. Identifying and defining the scope of the problem
2. Setting and determining the scope of the investigation objectives
3. Assembling adequate manpower with appropriate skills and experience to form a committee
4. Identifying target population for interrogation/questioning
5. Verifying and confirming collected information for accuracy
6. Submitting the findings and recommendations to the government

But the military investigators had to narrow down their scope of investigation to exclude exploring the possibility of political and external connections because of lack of proper government authorizations to contact and interrogate certain people. Many believe, the restrictions on the investigators may have been imposed to protect the local and external conspirators who had teamed up to play havoc with the defense system of the country.

Even though the army report did not find any convincing links of politicians and external powers to this sad episode that shook the entire defense system of the country, the involvement of some elements within the government and some foreign intelligence agencies should not be ruled out because, as per the report, the government imposed restrictions on investigators to limit their power to collect necessary evidence, verify obtained information, and confirm information sources to identify, investigate, establish and confirm involvement of political and foreign elements in the mindless killing of the officers at the BDR headquarters.

The events in the BDR headquarters were meticulously planned by some powerful quarters to use BDR against army to kill as many officers as possible to leave no able hands to lead this force in order to achieve the goals of destroying the border defense system of the country, avenging the incident in Roumari in 2001, proving BDR as an indisciplined force to create a situation to make it imperative to reorganize it with the help of a certain neighbor and creating a permanent mistrust and suspicion between the two forces entrusted with the responsibilities of protecting national security..

The political connections to the incident are visible from a series of events, including a section of politicians and media launched a vituperative attack on the army for its role in the events on and after 1/11 to instigate anti army sentiment across the country; the government did not order 350 RAB personnel, who reached the gate of BDR headquarters at 10:10 am, for an action against the mutineers, who were yet to be organized and set up heavy arms at the gates of the headquarters; the government ordered the 46th brigade of Bangladesh army, who reached the gates of the BDR headquarters at 10:50 am, to go out of sight from the headquarters which gave the rebels enough time to organize themselves to kill and torture more people in the BDR complex; the mutineers were given a chance to contact the media to propagate unfounded accusations against Bangladesh army; and a list was prepared in advance to torture and kill the wives of the army officers.

Even though the army report attributed the failure of Juba League’s president Jahangir Kabir Nanak and general secretary Mirza Azam in the negotiation with the rebels to surrender arms and release the hostages to lack of professionalism, the thing that is still bugging a lot of people is the reason why the prime minister chose these two fellows who had no prior experience in crisis management and had a criminal record of killing 11 Innocent civilians by setting fire to a double decker bus near Sheraton hotel in 2004. Let me quote the passage from the report published in a newspaper( The New Nation, Jun, 3, 2007), where one of the top Awami League leaders, Mr. Sheikh Selim, disclosed the cold blooded murder of innocent civilians by Nanak and Azam:

“He also disclosed that AL’s front organisation Juba League’s president Jahangir Kabir Nanak and general secretary Mirza Azam were involved in killing 11 people by setting fire to a double-decker BRTC bus near Dhaka Sheraton Hotel in 2004. Both Nanak and Azam held a meeting at Juba League office in the evening on that day and made a plan to commit the arson. “I protested the incident to our party chief and told her the politics cannot be done in such a way,” the investigators said quoted Selim as saying.”

Although the investigators were able to confirm the involvement of a local Awami League leader, Torab Ali, in the mutiny, they, however, were unable to establish a link between him and his partners in the political circle due to absence of government authorizations to contact and question the top ruling party leaders. This, many believe, may have been done to conceal the political connections to the mutiny and the subsequent murder of scores of brilliant army officers.

It is astounding that the military investigators did not even try to explore external connections to the mutiny because such an impeccable operation to carryout large scale killings of army officers was not the work of a bunch of youngsters, but rather the work of a professional organization who had inside information to plan and execute such a flawless military mission at the heart of the nation’s defense establishment to take out all the intended targets and ensure safe exit for all those who took part in it.

There is a growing fear of Indian involvement in the BDR revolt and the mass killing of the army officers at the BDR headquarters because of the comments of Mr. Pranab Mukharjee who said, “I had to go out of my way to issue a stern warning to those trying to destabilise the Sheikh Hasina government in Bangladesh that if they continued with their attempts, then India would not sit idle.” (OUTLOOK india.com, Mar, 16, 2009) , which is another way of saying that India would have approved a direct military intervention if developments in Bangladesh had gone against their strategic interest.

The same report also said, “New Delhi had conveyed it was willing to take counter-measures in Dhaka, direct intervention included.” Now the question is why did the Indian minister issue such a warning to Bangladesh? Did he not believe the people and the security forces of Bangladesh are capable enough to protect their own prime minister? Or did he want to conceal India’s own involvement in the mutiny through intimidation? Whatever the case may be, India’s over enthusiasm in our internal affairs has raised some serious suspicions about its intentions with regard to our national security.

The order to put Indian air force on a stand by mode (Samachar.com, mar, 2, 2009) and deploy para commandos from Agra to West Bengal (The Times of India, Mar, 4, 2009) to deal with emergency situations can also be construed as Indian attempts to interfere in our internal affairs using the tensions created after the mutiny, and if we combine this with the comments of Mr. Pranab Mukharjee then a strategic scenario emerges where Bangladesh is being destabilized with the intent to force herself into a long term bilateral security arrangements to pave the way for India to play greater roles in the matters of Bangladesh’s security and defense. And the proof of it can be found in a report in The Telegraph, a Calcutta based newspaper, where India offered to send a peace mission to give security to the Calcutta-Dhaka-Calcutta Moitree express and termed it as the first international bilateral peace mission by India after its peace mission in Sri-Lanka (The Telegraph, Feb, 27, 2009).

Another report from the same newspaper that said “Details of the talks were not immediately available but the US has been keen that India plays a stabilising role in the South Asian region. It is in this context that the Indian effort to send a peace mission, not only for the security of the train service between Dhaka and Calcutta, but also in a larger context, preferably on an appeal from Dhaka, will be internationally acceptable to Washington.”(The Telegraph, Feb, 28, 2009) is detrimental to our national security because it proves, in light of recently concluded Indo-U.S. Strategic agreement, there is ample international support for India to play larger role in South Asia, in general, and Bangladesh, in particular. This is what many have been saying for a while that the bilateral task force, military exercise between Bangladesh and Indian armed forces and the revolt by the BDR members are all part of a grand design to make the security forces of Bangladesh subservient to the strategic and political interests of India and Awami League.

External linkages to the BDR revolt can also be found by the seizure of various fire arms, equipment and other military gadgets at the BDR headquarters that are not used by any security agencies in the country (The Daily Star, Mar, 3, 2009). Experts believe such sophisticated military gadgets were supplied by external sources to perform the killings of the army officers in the BDR headquarters complex.

Concluding observations

With the growing suspicion of involvement of some elements within the government in the well orchestrated revolt at BDR headquarters firstly, to rid BDR of army officers for the purpose of weakening our border security and secondly, to kill the brightest army officers with an ultimate plan to destroy our defense system, the government is feeling the heat from both the army and the people of the country.

Sensing the impending danger of being exposed, a certain quarter has revived the old arms smuggling case and is frantically trying to associate the opposition parties, the intelligence agencies, and even Pakistan and its external spy agency, ISI, with ULFA to convince the public of the existence of a nexus among the nationalistic forces and defense establishment of the country, Pakistan and United Liberation Front of Assam with a sole purpose of falsely accuse them of sponsoring terrorism and masterminding the carnage at the BDR headquarters. In order to make their case more convincing and deal a heavy blow to our national defense, they even dragged China, the largest arms supplier and trusted defense partner of Bangladesh, into this complex scenario.

Gruesome murder of the army officers, prompt announcement of general amnesty by the prime minister without properly understanding the ground reality, unabated media propaganda to humiliate the army, reluctance of the government to order for a military action against the rebels, decision to send Jahangir Kabir Nanak and Mirza Azam, who have criminal records of killing 11 innocent civilians, as negotiators, stern warning by Indian minister Pranab Mukherjee of military intervention against Bangladesh, and the subsequent deployment of Indian troops along the border suggest the involvement of powerful local and external elements in the BDR revolt to accomplish a diabolical plan to inflict enormous damage upon the defense system of Bangladesh.

The army investigators should have done an exhaustive investigation into the possibility of involvement of political and foreign elements in the BDR revolt to expose the real conspirators for the sake of our national security, but unfortunately the army report made no attempts to do so probably because it had no mandate to explore political and foreign connections, or the Indian threat of military intervention might have forced them to confine their investigation to only a small area just to identify the BDR jawans who were involved in the killings of the officers and bring charges against them.

Lastly, the defense forces of the country should know that similar attempts to incite rebellions in other security forces will be attempted in future if the real culprits are not exposed and punished with iron fist.

* * * * *

Shah Mohammed Saifuddin is a contributor to News From Bangladesh and is founder of Bangladesh Strategic and Development Forum

A Scientist with Vision, Purpose

Dr. Chowdhury Sajjadul Karim
Dhaka

I was still a student of physics department of Dhaka University when I saw Dr. M.A. Wazed Miah, a lively young scientist at the Atomic Energy Centre, Dhaka. I was using the mainframe computer facility of the Centre, the only one in the then Pakistan. The place had already left its footprints firmly on many laboratories in many countries. The achievements were made possible by the dedication of the scientists of the centre. In those days these finest and highly trained gentlemen believed in sharing of knowledge and making output excel though group endeavors.

Dr. Wazed Miah was an important member of the select group. It appeared that he was possibly restless, looking for new opportunities for advancement of science and technology, to make science more meaningful to societal development. I remember having seen him for the last time as a senior colleague at Bangladesh Atomic Energy Commission in February, 1999, the last day of his career with the organization. Even at that point of parting with his workplace of 36 years, not even an iota of his enthusiasm had withered. This is the finest example of dedication and unflinching commitment to a cause.

In a developing country science and scientists are considered by some as redundant and unreal in the context of development. He once told me, “In a developing country, where resources are scarce, it’s only science and technology that can help maximize the benefits to the nation”. All the prolific years of his life were dedicated to the task of glorifying science and the men behind it.

I had the opportunity to work closely with him for a number of years towards the end of his career at the Bangladesh Atomic Energy Commission. This engagement was related primarily to the introduction of nuclear power. He was persuasive. I remember him calling on International Atomic Energy Agency director general Dr. Mohamed ElBaradei in Vienna in 1998. He emphasized the country’s commitment to peaceful uses of atomic energy and urged the agency to send a high-level delegation to Bangladesh to help assess the needs for fast-track implementation of the project. His request was entertained and following deliberations in Dhaka a time-bound action plan was drawn up delineating the time lines for various activities to be undertaken by the two sides. A year on, a training course was financed by the agency, which was possibly the largest of its kind conducted in any of its member states. Without the persuasive request it would have taken years to arrange such an event. Such examples of his way of getting difficult tasks done efficiently and quickly galore.

Dr. Wazed Miah had the sharpest of minds. He could often recount exactly how he had written his comments on a matter even after many years. This is a glaring evidence of application, merit and sound logic that went behind his decisions. Many tend to forget even in a matter of days or months simply because a particular decision was made in the past without sound logic and analysis and commitment. These were alien to him. He dismissed anything done by a scientist unless it had impeccable and sound rationale. He believed firmly in this, and indeed it formed the basis of whatever he did in science.

He was a great believer in our combined capacity and potentials of the country. He had confidence in the role of science in development and in international collaboration in materializing that goal. But it is the responsibility of the scientists to choose appropriate programme that suit our needs. The cardinal objective should be found in a facilitating synergy between science and development, he once asserted. He found a lot of opportunities to tap nuclear science, be it in solving the problems of energy supply, or health care, or industries. Such perceptions made him look for new fronts and avenues. His vision was to have a future society based on scientific knowledge.

Dr. Wazed Miah wrote as many as seven text books, six of which have already been published. The seventh I hear was at the final stages of his editorial attention when he expired. I bear the testimony to the great efforts level that went into these tasks. The books were exhaustive to cater to the pedagogical needs of undergraduate or graduate students.

His logic was clear—the students in a developing country cannot afford to buy multiple text books for a subject. A student should buy the second text book only if he needs to learn beyond the curriculum. These text books were, therefore, written in such a way that they were more or less in-depth. I saw him editing one or two manuscripts. He read and reread each sentence, each paragraph, made editorial corrections, usually with pencil, eraser or even razor blades. The painstaking job went on and on until he was satisfied that the text was acceptable. His passion and patience for excellence were almost insatiable when it came to writing and editing. It is not that he had all the time in the world and easy tasks to do. Such problems were solved by putting in long hours day in and day out.

Dr Wazed Miah set different standards for his colleagues and knew exactly what could be expected of each of them. Any deviation, unless justifiable on solid grounds, would mean a glare or two and in most cases one such episode was enough. I once took longer than expected to do something, or perhaps the job was not to his liking, I don’t remember correctly. The famous glare he gave me was so scaring that I decided to be out of his sight for some days. I requested one of my very good friends to carry my files to him. The respite was brief, though, as I had to visit him in the hospital where he was receiving treatment for heart ailment. He waved other visitors out of his room, gave me a smile and said, “C.S. Karim (that’s how he used to address me), how long can you keep on running away? Take these files, I have signed them already.” He hardly took more than a day to sign anything that landed on his desk. And files and papers always came back with comments, usually making one to ponder, “How could I miss this, or make such a silly mistake?”

To Dr Wazed Miah, the man behind scientific pursuit was the most important pre-requisite to any success. He told me about the importance of understand the divergence of opinions of society about the scientists if we want to change the perception. Only then scientists will have better chance of finding their due places in the society. We should do our bit before expecting a reciprocal action. The research and development programmes have to be made responsive to national needs and priorities. “Reach out and find out where your effort levels are needed most,” he would say.

He headed professional associations and outlets where one of his main goals was to sensitize a wide spectrum of society to the need to understand the impact science and technology could have on the national life.

Probably he was not fully satisfied with what was possible to attain. The unfinished task has to be taken forward; the responsibility lies with today’s scientists.

I don’t know of any instance in Bangladesh where a scientist has been honoured, even in a small way. The exception to this is the naming of a road on Dr. Kudrat-e-Khuda. Can we, even for a change, make an exception? Can we do something that would not only pay tribute to this outstanding scientist, but also serve as an inspirational icon for the next generations of scientists.

On Saturday, the 9th May of 2009, came the final moments of the life of a visionary scientist—Dr. Wazed Miah., a scientist with outstanding qualities, dedication and versatility. We will mourn and brood, no doubt. At the same time it is time to take a vow to finish his dreams. The torch is passed on to the new generation of scientists to march ahead with the same dream, with a resolve to finish the task begun with great vigor and traversed only a part of the road that lies ahead.

* * * * *

Dr. Chowdhury Sajjadul Karim, popularly known as Dr. C.S. Karim, is a former Chairman of Bangladesh Atomic Energy Commission and was an advisor of the de facto 11 January, 2007 undemocratic government of Bangladesh.

Courtesy: BDNews24

South Asia Under Fire

M. Tawsif Salam
Dhaka

It appears that the nuclear deal between India and United States has been followed by numerous violent events in adjacent countries of India. Pakistan has seen a fresh phase of anarchies that includes a tremendous escalation of terrorism in both frontier and deep inside the territory. Terrorist organizations those had their actions mostly based in frontier regions between Afghanistan and Pakistan are being seen tending to converge deep inside Pakistani, specially the Northwest Frontier Province (NWFP). Series escalation of terrorism those are spreading furiously in urban Pakistan has also become the most concerning to date.

Violence in Pakistan that is only in Pakistan still could be considered as internal matters of a country. But observing commotions in other South Asian countries have urged the observers to note it that this might be something bigger than internal matters of a single state. Series of unexpected incidents in both Bangladesh and Sri Lanka is leading South Asia to be an endangered region. The carnage took place in Bangladesh’s border guard headquarters that left an almost hundred slain military officers, has been a major notification in South Asia that peace is at a vulnerable position. The whole matter around Pilkhana has been immensely fishy where the government of Bangladesh has been found to be more conservative that they should have been. Initially the senior members of the government tried to create a political division over the matter by blaming their political rival for the carnage. An unexpected and fruitless political blame-game was triggered that was leaving a lot of cloud for the investigators. So far the governmental bodies cannot be kept out of suspicion because a many questions still remain unanswered. The federal investigating committee has been largely politicized by putting government ministers and ruling party leaders to lead the committee. Keeping the fact in mind that the perpetrators caused an irreparable damage to the defence apparatus of the country, the perpetrators appear to receive a number of advantages for bewildering decisions of the government. Hence the biggest attack to the date on Bangladeshi defence apparatus has been made.

Events taking place in Bangladesh those chronically have followed the medieval carnage at Pilkhana, could be a part of the efforts where the overall peace of South Asia is being bullied. An army officer was found stabbed to death in a Dhaka hotel in the same week of the carnage. Three other army officers were killed in an event which appears to be a helicopter crash, including a two-star General. Another two-star general and a single-star general were killed in Pilkhana. Series of hits on the people who are deeply associated with the national security structure of Bangladesh are not at all scattered incidents. Initially Bangladesh security analysts told the border guards carnage could be a retaliation of an incident of 2001 where a wave of Indian raiders were valiantly pushed away by Bangladesh border guards, leaving a death toll of 21 Indian soldiers, 3 Bangladeshi soldiers and hundred more casualties.

Another incident in this second Friday of March 2009 has escalated the security tensions of Bangladesh up to a concerning height. A fire outbreak in the biggest shopping mall of Bangladesh, the Bashundhara City can appear as a powerful hit over Bangladesh economy. The economy of Bangladesh already has become a victim of global economical shrinking and massive curtailment at global job market. Still no formula has been found out that the Bashundhara incident indeed has been a hit, but our intelligence apparatus has to work it out. There has to be found that whether this has been part of the effort which is gradually breaching the peace of South Asia, after the powerful alliance of two malicious giants of world diplomacy. We have to learn if this has been a part of the process that has been initiated in order to bring changes in the map of South Asia. If all the mishaps taking place in recent times are all related, these will no more be considered as attacks on certain sectors rather than it will be considered as attack on the sovereignty and independence of Bangladesh.

Student Politics : Ban or Reformation?

M. Tawsif Salam
Dhaka

It was a party at Bury Saint Edmunds (Suffolk, England) attended by some Bangladeshi professionals with their families. Though it was only a week passed after the election, politics was not popular among the words circulated. But at one moment someone raised the point of student politics and almost certainly most of the guests consented that there should be a ban over the student politics in Bangladesh.

Like these Bangladeshi professionals living abroad and having conscious eyes over the politics back in homeland, most of the educated people of Bangladesh are seen to be very keen about a ban on the national student politics.

Ban over the student politics will be a solution like ejecting eyes in order to cure an optical disease.

This sort of procedure I believe the previous regime felt most comfortable to apply; something like suspending democracy as politics have gone wrong, jailing politicians arbitrarily as some of them have gone violent, in order to save the nation you know. But a cordial ‘thank you’ to the almighty and may be to the previous regime kingpins that they haven’t thought of anything like banning student politics by state legislation or something. But the sense, or the thought which have helped them best to create their initial moral ground, I feel is most enthusiastic to look forward for a law that’ll ban student politics. The issue which I have discussed here, is, the craze of power of our politicians, completely imprudent ‘getting to power’ policies of the parties and exploitation of the situation of some apolitical individuals (from inside or abroad), gave birth of the 1/11 government. And the role of the politicians here has been most vital, which have gradually convinced Bangladeshi people that peace and progressiveness are to appear as elusive in Bangladeshi politics. From this of the attitudes of seeing the politics as a nun looks at a whore, many of our educated countrymen think that banning student politics must be a prerequisite of peace.

The history of Bangladesh shows us patterns of politics to evolve where many of the most loved politicians have had their ‘entity of politician’ to be born in universities and colleges, places those are considered as conscience of the whole nation. No other part of the society thinks and acts in the way that the students of a country do. There are many problems identified and many questions asked only by the student society of a nation. Today in Bangladesh we can talk about sidelining the culture of student politics, because we have become so reticent to recall our past and history where we have many of our political crisis pursued, dealt and replied progressively by the society of students. It’s the society of students which is able to react and to send tremendously effective shockwaves to all and all sectors of the system immediately after discovering stressful glimpse of commons. Now some apolitical individuals, whose courage of ignoring the national interest is the result of our indefinite reticence and our imprudent politics, took over the government ousting democracy which got prominence in name of 1/11. The birth of the 1/11 government has already been a political disaster for Bangladesh. Closing down the door of politics for students will be a closure for many youths with devotion, patriotism and brilliance. It will appear as nothing but self-contradiction if we look for better politicians by banning student politics; will appear as invitation for 1/11 kind of disaster to once again suspend democracy.

However there is no argument over the fact that events often take place in Bangladesh for people to get sore on student politics. The present government which is outcome of however an election have taken office accompanied by hope and expectations of better politics and better practice of democracy. Keeping the debate aside whether any physical cause of such hope ever existed, expectations have been deeply buried by activities of respective wings of ruling party. Behavior of the government, the Election Commission as well as the ruling party at Upazila polls have been in such way that the unpleasant fact is about to come out; there was nothing in the idea and deeds of the 1/11 regime that could buy us a culture of better democratic practices. In fact it can be stated about the 1/11 regime that a government which itself appears amid an evil expulsion of democracy can never be a subject to deliver better practices of democracy. The takeover of the newly elected government has been visibly followed by incidents of political violence and culture of muscling which most unfortunately had major roles for student wing of the ruling party.

I consider the newly elected and formed government to not be fully prepared to take and work on the control they have got. The house is still to get its pace and the cabinet too does not look or seem structurally compact. There was a major task to work on at the very initial stage that is the Upazila polls where the present government has seen overwhelming failure and hopefully they will admit it. Considering failures as part of everything and considering statements of Tanjim Ahmed Sohel as attempt to cover-up as a governmental spokesperson often does, the complete stability in the national politics is yet to come; eventually still the focus is not over the issue of student politics. But the issue is too important and requires effective attention of our statespersons.

A group of people who like us to call them as the “progressive civil society” or “shushil shomaj” and who outlines longer and scholarly foreseeing plans for better Bangladesh judging things only those they see in or around Dhaka, has very different views about the student politics. Some of them have missed some appointments or seminars because some Dhaka University or Titumir College students have gone rowdy and created a mess on the streets. So they want student politics banned forever. This is just an example and I am not going to generalize the whole thing just based on it. The point which plays here is, the only proposition that “shushil shomaj” could deliver about student politics is campuses should be kept clear of politics. In this kind of demand, there is disrespect for politics; disrespect for our history thereby there remains disrespect for us. We can easily imagine what the scenario could be if student politics is banned indiscreetly in all campuses. A generation of students will be under construction which will concern nothing other than their self interests, which will have a dilapidated view on politics of Bangladesh and will contain no respect for our statespersons. Keeping the debate of respect worthiness of our politicians aside, the closure of student politics will trigger an unhealthy process of depoliticizing of our youths. The process will give birth of a large apolitical population who will just learn to take part in criticism rather than delivering constructive ideas. There will be a lot of people which we already have a handful of, to put more than perfect slangs behind failures and misappropriation by people in politics. But there will be none to have enthusiasm to get into what they call “dirty” and to cleanse it. We already have plenty of critics. But we need people to get to work more than we need people to do criticism. And for meeting such need or at least to help such people come forward, there should be a very effective reformation over our national student politics.

Bangladesh has seen number of political crisis and there were politicians and experts with brilliance to help us overcome the deadlocks. Student politics should be taken as a concern by them and should be pushed through reformations. As an overview of Bangladeshi student politics does not tell us it is in good shape, strategists of all political parties are to be unleashed to explore rooms to reform it. The major challenge for such reformations will be campus violence those often erupts based on illegitimate interests inside campuses those shouldn’t concern the students ethically. There take place hasty and violent political moves by student wings those come up as annoyance for general students. Reformers of student politics will get in touch with many of these problems those obstruct it to move onwards progressively. There will be seen problems and these will have to be resolved. But no room should be given to the proposition that a ban will work over the student politics. We have a certain sector of politics having troubles. Now if banning that certain sector is one of options rather than thinking about fixing it up, then there is no point of having politicians to deal with tricky situations, in fact there remains no point in our expectation of better democratic practices to move onward progressively in politics.

So “no” to ban, “yes” to reorganization and reformation.

* * * * *

This post has also been published here in Weekly Economic Times.

The Untargeted Chief of All Devils

M. Tawsif Salam
Suffolk, UK

In all of the political discussions, the question that inevitably is asked to the political analysts of strategists is, what improvements in politics have been done as result of what happened in 11 January, 2007. None of the people who ask this question try to realize that there has been done nothing to make our politicians feel that they need to be more serious and more ardent to commit better things to the people. Everyone feels comfortable to misunderstand the 1/11 event something like the whole classroom has been kept under detention as many of the students became rowdy. The 1/11 was nothing like that and whoever came forward to punish the classroom did not have prosperous agendas to commit so. Thus it will be our own faults if we think the politics of Bangladesh have received enough lessons to deliver all the divines henceforth.

It is quite amazing to hear we are having the population more than the superpower Russian Federation does have. It’s amazing to be the 7th on the list whereas Russia is 9th, UK is 22nd and Canada, France, Italy, Germany all are below our rank. And beside the amazement it is out utmost failure of noticing and our imprudence that this population has made ourselves a bowl which never fills. It is the increasing population of Bangladesh which has presented us the fate where may be we won’t see the day when our empty bowls of demands will be pouring. A tremendously tight count of resources with a population increasing without any controlled and positively expected rate, are on the way to take us to a valley where all of the formulas of prosperity will se failures to bail us out of the disaster. The disaster is up ahead. And the disaster is simple to explain. It’s just a situation where we got an immense count of population but not even a fraction of necessary resources and nobody delivering words to provide us with them. It’s so simple like a family having all ways of incomes crucially closed, a family with numbers of members to feed, a family with no friends or relatives ready to borrow or charity or something, a family having no definite way other than to be on streets begging to be fed.

I remember that the population was a prime issue of social and technical studies when we were at school. For a country like Bangladesh, population has always been the prime concern. As far as we are not to maintain the luxury of beating superpowers like Russia, United Kingdom or France having the population of 159 millions of people, we are also not to afford to overlook this vital concern of ours which can turn all of our earnings in coming days into useless. We don’t have a definite food plan to deal with what the population will be ten or twenty years later. We don’t have a definite power plan to provide with electricity and fuel to what the population will be ten or twenty years later. And all these things which we are ought to do in coming days will have to be done by who we will be voting for a week later. But did you see manifestos of them? Did you find what are they thinking about the increasing population in any of their manifestos? One of the party heads has dedicated the manifesto to all those will cast vote for the first time. But there is no definite declaration of what to be done to ensure their effort to keep on their lineages hundreds of years later. On of the party heads has promised to his constituency voters that rice and lentils as regular meals will be made free for all. A proverb goes in North-eastern Europe, the only way to get cheese and to not pay is raiding rat holes; rat holes are only place from where free foods used to come. So there is commitment of delivering foods from rat holes but there is no commitment on how to deal with some more millions of people who will be added in coming years.

The absence of population issue in the political manifestos has been noticed crudely. Some of the political analysts and strategists have mentioned the manifestos as advertisement leaflets of the parties to have the people casting their votes for the particular parties. As the population issue is quite old to do marketing jobs with, most of the manifestos have dropped it out. This is disappointing. There is no permanent result at the end of a shortcut. Every developments, every prosperities, every agenda have to be implemented in an ongoing process with immense patience. And politicians of a country are to be set on those ongoing processes. And their so vicious overlook of a so important issue like the increasing population will urge the people of Bangladesh to reconsider their choice of handing over the ruling-sceptre of the nation.

This post has also been published in Weekly Economic Times

Toward The Election with a Biased Media

M. Tawsif Salam
Suffolk, UK

It’s not necessary to have the political history of hundreds of years to contain political events of multiple dimensions. Bangladesh in her history of not a lot more than 37 years has seen quite a lot of kinds of elections; elections under military rule, elections under democratic governments, election under constitutionally explicable caretaker governments etc. But this time Bangladesh is going to experience such a situation were we are to vote under authority of such a government, which is neither a direct military rule, nor a constitutional caretaker government.

This has completely been a newer way of rupture to the constitution, made of some party-loving people like to do reunion kind of thing at Tommy Mia’s Gulshan kitchen or something. The situation is virtually different from what it has been seen before. The present authority which has an outspoken renown as the “1/11 government”, is going to handover the power to another government, which they say to be elected by public polls. Or by the other kind of saying, or it makes sense if we say what really will be going on in fact, the handover will be done to a group of people who are not really disappointed with the rupture of the constitution. In fact we have these interested groups who have expressed their will to “ratify” all the constitution-breaches. And things obviously look like the stage and all other surroundings have been set to have that group of illicitly interested people winning the upcoming election.

I was really stunned to hear Munni Saha of ATN Bangla saying Akbar Hussain was called “Ekbar Hussain (এক বার হোসেন)” in Comilla because he used to go to Comilla not very often. Many politicians in many of the localities are called in different sorts of names and some of them are pretty abusive. But this does not mean a nation-wide television channel will have their reporters hailing those names. Sedgefield (Durham, UK) politician Jonathan Cockburn in 2005 has several times given names to Tony Blair and other Labour Party seniors. Cockburn had pretty large number of supporters at Sedgefield. But we definitely would have to think about the neutrality and sense of decency of Sky News if one of their reporters would call Blair a wacko while reviewing pre-election air in Durham; so we’ve done and all of Bangladeshi should do, everybody awaited for a fair election should take the concern of whether ATN Bangla with their fellow comrades in the front line are neutral or just working with the target of bailing a party as winner out of the election, a party which has leaders of it expressing their impudence for getting to the power, saying “we will ratify everything every violators in this government did with anybody”.

Many of Awami League leaders have been tremendously upset about having their rivals and Jamaat-e-Islami running together. Well, actually they don’t think about there can be someone looking back to their track they have left behind. The photo given here is for the evaluation of those who have shown their immense patience by reading this of my posts down to this bottom of it.

Mumbai: The Uneducable Indian

Ajai Sahni
Delhi.

A long derided Union Home Minister, Shivraj Patil has been forced out; Maharashtra State Home Minister, R.R. Patil has succumbed to public and media pressure and resigned after a crass comment that “such things keep happening in big cities”; the Maharashtra Chief Minister Vilasrao Deshmukh, is tottering on the verge of resignation after engaging in some heedless ‘disaster tourism’ at the devastated Taj Mahal Hotel; other heads are poised to roll. Has the latest Mumbai carnage pushed India beyond the ‘tipping point’ in its responses to terrorism? Is it now possible to expect a radical break with past patterns, where each major incident has been followed – to borrow a phrase applied to the Left parties during the nuclear debate, but which accurately describes the entire political class in this country – by some “running around like headless chickens”, to lapse quickly into a habitual torpor? And can India’s polarized and unprincipled political parties come to a consensual understanding and strategy on counter-terrorism, instead of subordinating the national interest to partisan electoral calculations and the politics of ‘vote banks’?

Regrettably, there are already too many signs that it is going to be ‘business as usual’ in India.

At the height of the confrontation in Mumbai, L.K. Advani, the Leader of the Opposition and the man projected as the Bharatiya Janata Party’s (BJP) Prime Ministerial candidate in the coming elections next year, kindled a spark of hope, calling for an all-party consensus on counter-terrorism, and declaring, “at this juncture, the country needs to fight the terrorist menace resolutely and stand together”. However, even before the fighting had ended, partisan political sniping had commenced on the round-the-clock television coverage and debates, and this has escalated to a point of viciousness even while the debris of the attacks is being cleared out. Crucially, when Prime Minister Manmohan Singh convened an all-party meeting at Delhi on December 1, 2008, Advani and BJP President, Rajnath Singh, chose to absent themselves, though V.K. Malhotra, Deputy Leader of the BJP Parliamentary Party, did attend.

Governmental responses, moreover, show little sign of coming to terms with the enormity of the issue. The Prime Minister has chosen to emphasise amendments to the prevailing laws on terrorism – currently a set of toothless provisions inserted in 2005 into the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 – and the mirage of a Federal Investigation Agency that is intended to make all terrorism in the country miraculously vanish, simply because it pretends to imitate the American Federal Bureau of Investigation in nomenclature and intent. Neither of these initiatives, however, has any potential whatsoever to contain the rampage of terrorism across a country that remains pitifully under-policed, with a paper thin intelligence cover concentrated in a few urban centres and strategic locations.

There has also been a reiteration of assurances that ‘maritime security’ will be beefed up, with more power and resources to the Coast Guard and Coastal Police Stations, and better coordination between these Forces, and with the Navy. But this is all tired old stuff and has been articulated ad nauseum, since 2001, with little evidence of change in capacities on the ground. Indeed, the critical capacities – those for policing – are actually undergoing continuing erosion, with the latest National Crime Records Bureau Report indicating that the police – population ratio for the country at large actually declined from an abysmal 126/100,000 in 2006 to 125/100,000 in 2007.

Of course, a few random sanctions for augmentation of capacities have been announced in the wake of past attacks – including the sanction of 6,000 additional personnel for the Intelligence Bureau (IB), immediately after the serial blasts in Delhi on September 13, 2008. Given the country’s turgid and obstructive bureaucracy, however, there are no signs of these sanctions resulting in an augmentation of capacities on the ground any time soon. The very idea of responding on a war footing, cutting through red tape and existing institutional limitations, does not appear to exist in any aspect of the country’s counter-terrorism responses.

And then, of course, there is a question of response to the very obvious role of Pakistan – and this is a palpable dead end. Even preliminary investigations have thrown up overwhelming evidence that every string of control in the multiple terrorist strikes in Mumbai leads back to Pakistan and to the Lashkar-e-Toiba (LeT) – an organization that, under its new identity as the Jamaat-ud-Dawa continues to enjoy direct state support in Pakistan. In a rare outburst, Prime Minister Singh warned unnamed “neighbours” that “the use of their territory for launching attacks on us will not be tolerated, and that there would be a cost if suitable measures are not taken by them.” His Government is now reportedly “under pressure” to act against Pakistan, and a range of hair-brained responses are doing the rounds in official circles, including massive troop mobilization along the border, mimicking the purposeless massing of troops under Operation Parakram, launched on December 16, 2001, after the terrorist attack on India’s Parliament. 680 soldiers were killed, without a single shot being fired, by the time Operation Parakram was, inexplicably, called off on October 16, 2002, with the unsupported claim that its undefined “objectives” had been achieved. If this worthless and counter-productive exercise is the model to be replicated in the present case, it would be no less than tragic. If, on the other hand, it is not, then there is little capacity – at this juncture – to design effective alternatives, in the foreseeable future, to impose any “cost” on Pakistan, and such capacities can only be constructed, gradually and systematically, over time, and with a clear strategy in mind – and there is little evidence of the latter at this juncture.

Indeed, the overwhelming focus of the Indian response to Pakistan’s role – either as the source of these attacks, or more direct involvement of the state’s agencies in engineering or facilitating them – appears to be concentrated on diplomatic efforts to bring international pressure to bear on Pakistan. This has been an apparently successful initiative, with world leaders coming out with some of the most unambiguous condemnations of the incident and commitments to support India’s efforts to address the problem in all its dimensions. Crucially, US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is to arrive at Delhi on December 3, on a visit that many expect (or, more likely, hope) will produce more than just a very strong ‘message’ to Islamabad. While all this will certainly make the powers that be in Pakistan squirm a bit, there is little reason to believe that the dynamic that has protected them in past and even greater transgressions, both in the region and well beyond, will not, once again, reassert itself. The truth is, it is not just India that is powerless to impose any unbearable pain on the basket case that is Pakistan – the ‘international community’, particularly including USA – are no better positioned. It is useful to recall, here, that US intelligence agencies concurred with Afghan and Indian agencies, that Pakistan’s Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) had engineered the terrorist bombing of the Indian Embassy on July 7, 2008, and there had been great expectations, at that juncture as well, that this would result in stronger action against Islamabad. Pakistan, however, has weathered many such storms and its diplomats and proxies are quick to range across the world peddling their theories of root causes and Muslim grievance to ever-willing audiences in the West and, indeed, even in victim countries such as India.

In the meanwhile, the attack in Mumbai has done what may well be irreparable damage to the “shining” image of the “emerging global power”. The utter incapacity and incompetence of India’s security apparatus has been incontrovertibly demonstrated in what may be an audacious attack by as few as 10 terrorists (nine have been confirmed killed and one is currently in custody, singing like a canary). It is crucial, here, to notice the exemplary courage, exemplary leadership and exemplary dedication to duty, among those who responded from the security forces, who were given virtually nothing to fight with, and who still put everything they had into the fight, with many losing their lives. Their personal commitment and attainment notwithstanding, the reality of the institutional and structural responses is disgraceful. While a detailed analysis of the counter-terrorism (CT) operation must wait till far more information is available, a few aspects are already evident.The most significant of these is the sheer tardiness and inadequacy of response. The first shots in the multiple attacks in Mumbai were fired at about 21:40 in the evening of November 26, and the incident was already on national television by 22:00 (all timings are approximate and based on available open source reportage). Local Police contingents – including the Anti-terrorism Squad (ATS) headed by Hemant Karkare, who lost his life in the encounter – responded fairly quickly, but, lacking protective equipment, firepower and even the most rudimentary CT training, with tragic consequences, losing top line Police leaders in the very first engagements. After that, the world witnessed the most astonishing paralysis, as the locations of attack were loosely cordoned off by variously armed Police contingents, but no forces appeared equipped or willing to enter and engage for hours following. It was evident that even the most basic of response protocols had not been established, and the word repeatedly occurring in every live report in these long initial hours was “chaotic”. As one commentator in the New York Times noted, “The grainy television imagery suggested not so much a terrorist attack as the shapeless, omnidirectional chaos of Iraq.” Local contingents of the Army – arriving at about 02:50, more than five hours after the incident commenced – brought some semblance of order to the incident environments, but still did not enter the major sites of ongoing terrorist carnage.The first ’special response team’ to arrive was a small group of Marine Commandos (Marcos), who actually sought engagement with the terrorists – but their own accounts suggest that they were not able to neutralize a singly terrorist before they were pulled out. Eventually, a 200-strong contingent of the ‘elite’ National Security Guard (NSG) was deployed at 08:05, in the morning of November 27, and this is the point at which the terrorists can seriously be considered to have been engaged. But the NSG went into the locations blind – with no maps of the Taj Mahal Hotel and the Oberoi-Trident complex initially available – and were extraordinarily tentative, unsure weather they were dealing with a hostage situation, and transfixed by their fear of inflicting civilian casualties – the reality eventually disclosed was that the massacres in the three principal sites, the two hotels and Nariman House, where a Jewish family was trapped, were over long before the NSG engaged. The result was a stand-off that lasted all of 62 hours.

There is also, of course, the long succession of intelligence warnings that were given to the State Government, and that were also passed on to the security establishments of the hotels under threat, but even the limited security measures that were implemented by both local Police and the hotel security apparatus were, as Praveen Swami notes, “lifted a week before the attacks, after businesses and residents complained of inconvenience.” Swami, quotes an unnamed Police source, further, as stating, “We also removed additional security… because our manpower was stretched to the limit and the personnel we had did not, in any case, have the specially-trained personnel needed to avert a suicide-squad attack.”

The Maharashtra State Government has tried to package this operation as a grand success, arguing that the terrorists had “come to kill 5,000 people” and to “blow up the Taj” (both pieces of unmitigated nonsense), and that, consequently, the eventual loss of life and damage to various structure, was not ‘as high as it could have been’. The reality, however, is that the multiple attacks – at 11 different locations – by a tiny contingent of terrorists, inflicting 195 fatalities (the figure is tentative, with numbers still rising, and pending official confirmation) and leaving over 300 injured, and virtually devastating two major locations (the Taj and the Oberoi-Trident), fully achieved their attainable potential and were complete successes from the point of view of their planners. They cannot, consequently, be thought of as anything but comprehensive failures from the point of view of India’s security establishment. Indeed, the Mumbai carnage shows every mark of a botched operation from the security point of view. If anything, security forces’ (SF) action appears to have trapped the terrorists in the locations, blocking off their avenues of planned escape – even as it gave them significant freedom of operation within them – instead of quickly neutralizing them, and protracting the carnage for an incredible 62 hours.

Despite the extraordinary courage and evident commitment of SF personnel and leaders, the reality is that there was a comprehensive structural failure in Mumbai. Any terrorist operation can only be contained, in terms of its potential, in the first few minutes. Which means that the “first responders” – invariably the local Police – have to be equipped, trained and capable of, if not neutralising, then, at least, containing the terrorists. If the first batches of Police personnel had arrived in sufficient strength at each of the locations of terrorist attack in Mumbai, with appropriate weaponry, communications, transport and other technological force multipliers (such as, for instance, night vision goggles and thermal imaging systems for the major standoffs in the Taj, Oberoi-Trident and Nariman House) and immediately engaged with the terrorists, they probably would have been able, in at least these three locations, to isolate the terrorists in small corners of the target structures and would have been able to minimise the loss of life, the material damage, and the operational time.

Many journalists ask the routine question after each of the increasingly frequent major terrorist strikes across India: why did this happen again? The more rational question, given India’s capacities for intelligence, enforcement and CT response, is: why does this not happen more often?

Imitative mantras, such as “strong laws” and “federal agency” will not diminish the threat of terrorism that confronts India. It is only the hard slog of building effective capacities – not incrementally, in terms of what we already have, but radically, in terms of what we need – on a war footing, that will help diminish the enveloping and, progressively, crippling, threat of terrorism confronting India. Only this can help the Government recover from the loss of public confidence and of international prestige that this devastating attack has inflicted on the nation. Regrettably, a national leadership – across party lines – that has repeatedly betrayed the national security interest for partisan political gains, does not demonstrate the necessary capacities for learning that can create defences within any time frame that could be immediately relevant to the trajectory of terrorism in the country.

* * * * *

Ajay Sahni is the editor of South Asian Intelligence Review (SAIR) andExecutive Director of Institute for Conflict Management

Attacks strain India-Pakistan ties

David Loyn
27 November, 2008. Delhi.

Front page newspaper adverts appeared on Friday even while shooting was still going on, saying the incident shows that the Congress government is ‘unwilling and incapable’ of dealing with terrorism.

With the country in the middle of crucial state elections which could determine the timing of the next general election, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh is facing intense scrutiny.

Following the attacks, he has been seen visiting the injured in hospital, alongside Congress party president Sonia Gandhi.

He has already promised to strengthen anti-terrorist laws, and in a TV address came close to threatening retaliation against Pakistan if their involvement in the attacks can be proved.

“We will take up strongly with our neighbours that the use of their territory for launching attacks on us will not be tolerated, and that there would be a cost if suitable measures are not taken by them,” Mr Singh said.

Recent overtures

The Indian Navy has seized two Pakistani merchant ships and is investigating the possibility that they dropped off the militants who then came ashore in fast boats.

They are linking this with the discovery of a trawler, found abandoned off the Indian coastline on Thursday with its captain dead.

Pakistan’s denials of involvement have been clear and unambiguous.

The Pakistani ambassador to the US, Hussein Haqqani told the BBC that his country had suffered from terrorism just as much as India had, and offered every assistance in bringing the attackers to justice.

Analysts in Pakistan have been pointing instead to the possibility that these militants are home-grown Indian extremists, operating without external support.

The incident comes just as the first democratic government in Pakistan since the coup in 1999 has made overtures for better relations with India.

For the first time, President Asif Ali Zardari made the quite unexpected unilateral offer to make no first use of nuclear weapons in any conflict.

On Tuesday, home affairs ministers from the two countries met in Islamabad, and Pakistan’s foreign minister Shah Mahmoud Qureshi is by chance currently visiting India.

Proxy attacks

Such contacts are opposed by significant parts of the Pakistani army and particularly its intelligence service, the ISI, who have in the past inspired terrorist attacks in India to stop just such an improvement in relations between the two countries.

Feeling encircled – with India to their east allied with Afghanistan to their west – analysts believe they have taken the option of encouraging attacks by proxies, Islamists inspired to wage unconventional war.

An armed assault by militants on the Indian parliament in 2001 led to a significant worsening in relations that escalated into troops on both sides being sent to confront each other across their shared border.

A further possibility though is that this attack was carried out from Pakistan, but beyond the control either of Pakistan’s democratic government or its military establishment.

The war in Afghanistan has led to a further radicalisation of politics in Pakistan’s North-West Frontier Province, where a “Pakistani Taleban” have emerged.

Allied with foreign fighters from al-Qaeda, they have both the financial power and political will to carry out attacks of the sort seen in Mumbai.

* * * * *

David Loyn is a BBC Special Correspondent, one of the BBC men covering the deadly terrorist attacks on Southern Mumbai.