The recent attack on the young ruling party lawmaker Fazle Noor Taposh MP was not the first among deadly forays over politicians of Bangladesh. A common phrase in our country goes like, “where the murderers of Bangabandhu & Ziaur Rahman are never held, there will be no surprise if other high profile murders are let getaway.” Even after the unparallel massacre inside Bangladesh Riffles HQ at Pilkhana, Dhaka, many told that “the murderers here too will getaway and we won’t mind because we’ve seen trials on murders of Sheikh Mujib and Ziaur Rahman unsolved and it doesn’t matter whether we do mind or else”.

Nobody has anything to deny the fact that most of the legal fights for assassinations or attempts on high profile statesperson have not been properly conclusive just because the government at office has tried to politically utilize the issues, has ignored unhealthy diversion of investigation for sake of discomforting domestic political rivals. This is a tragic fact that’s applicable for almost all trials of the kind.

General population often gets annoyed at the common obsession that our politicians have of debating past sour issues. Here some sentences about past have been written just to amplify the fact that, may be a powerful bomb flew toward a member of the house all of a sudden shook the nation, but it won’t be a surprise if his legal fight too is found to have the same fate of being on pursuit of a zero.

Fazle Noor Taposh MP, although a very young lawmaker and is in quite an early stage of his expectedly brighter political future, has been put on the top of the current political focus by the attempt and it has rang to the minds of us that indeed Fazle Noor Taposh is stringed fervently to various high profile political concerns. He is,

• a notable panel lawyer in the trial on Bangabandhu’s assassination,
• a figure related to the controversy of government’s unpopular dialogue attempt with BDR mutineers at the late night of 25 February, 2009,
• an anticipated select by Sheikh Hasina to fight the upcoming mayoral elections in Dhaka for Awami League,
• and again a very close aide to Sheikh Hasina, almost the most trusted one having a political future brighter than almost anyone of his stage.

These are few positions we consider when we think about how Fazle Noor Taposh MP has been politically being since his appearance to acclaim.

Now let also have a serial of what the senior figures in the ruling party or the government have been saying over the matter.

Advocate Sahara Khatun, the Minister of Interior who already has seen the wrath of few AL leaders for possible security negligence, told “Taposh attack is ‘linked’ to Mujib killer” .

-
Syed Ashraful Islam, General Secretary of Awami League and Minister of LGRD & Cooperatives, told “the nation believes the killers of Bangabandhu, the extreme communal and anti-liberation forces were involved with the attack” .

-
Barrister Mahbubey Alam, the Attorney General and leader of a pro-AL lawyers’ group, told “The attack on Taposh proves that those who do not want the trial of the murder of Bangabandhu are trying to become active.”

-
Barrister Shafique Ahmed, the Minister of Law, told “Taposh attack aimed to save Mujib’s killers”

-

-
Dr. Dipu Moni, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, told “The attack was made by those who don’t want progress in trial of Bangabandhu’s murder”.

I don’t understand that why these senior AL leaders and others are pushing the matter to be a concern of Bangabandhu assassination trial. I mean it can be a fact that those who don’t want the trial being conclusive orchestrated the attack. But this is just a possibility, a speculation; so are the others that attack on Taposh could be a knock-off attempt by his domestic political rivals.

There has been a complaint made to police and they will investigate it, they will have to do it to dig for the truth. At this stage of investigation where nobody knows more than it was a bomb, the series of statements from AL leaders is just looking like a planned media manipulation where the immense influences are being made to manipulate public opinions. Questions may arise that how the ministers and the Attorney General are so confident that the attackers are linked to Bangabandhu’s assassins. Did the attackers tell them before bombing? Or did Bangabandhu’s assassins confirm that the new generation carnage will take place on Taposh?

This is highly concerning that why respective AL leaders and also the party’s Central Working Committee in absence of Sheikh Hasina is pressurizing the people to believe the attack having a link to Bangabandhu’s trial. What’s their source of confidence, what’s their source of information and finally what’s the motive of such premature statements? There are other grounds those have to be considered, why we have not heard a single person anywhere to talk about that?

Bangladeshi people have already learnt that they have a legal system that is not blind. This system can smell one’s political identity, can see the height of one’s political influence and finally can realize one’s power. The system drives itself in accordance with those feelings that a legal system is immensely malicious to have. Forgoing the attackers of a Member of Parliament won’t be a surprise because murderers of the Presidents and Prime Ministers in this country are let getaway.Facebook users click here.

Facebook users click here.

M. Tawsif Salam
11 September, 2009, Dhaka

Clockwise: Mohammed Salahuddin Chowdhury, Mohammad Shahjahan, Nurul Haque Miah, Abul Kashem Chowdhury, Shakila Yasmin and Shabbir Ahmed.

Immediately after the horrible 9/11 attacks, the perception about Bangladeshi fatalities was that at least 50 of our countrymen have been missing in the rubles, dead or else. Watching the twin towers of the World Trade Center emitting smokes almost like two sky-scrapping chimneys, initially very few people overseas were concerned about knowing how much people of what nationalities have been victims, apart from those who knowingly had family members, coworkers or friends working in New York’s Lower Manhattan that day.

People of approximately 60 nationalities were among the victims. The initial perception of around 50 Bangladeshis killed was later corrected as there were 12 Bangladeshi victims documented. Now this information too ain’t assuring as there were talks that there could be some Bangladeshis working around but ‘not documented’, might have been in terms of legal measures. This means disappointment, that the actual number of how many Bangladeshis were killed in 11 September 2001 attacks won’t be known ever.

For someone looking for stuffs about the Bangladeshi victims of 9/11, the initial disgust will be offered by the authority of Bangladesh, that’s our government. Throughout a staggering hunt for information about brothers & sisters we lost that day, one will completely fail to get something that can be thought is given or provided by any agencies or departments of Bangladesh government. It’s understandable that during the attack the administration at home was to execute a general election of nearly 70 million voters, so it couldn’t respond at once. But not only years passed rather it’s being almost a decade after a number of Bangladeshi deaths overseas, we rarely found any of our government people to pronounce a word about it or to provide at least some statistics. It can be that we ain’t keen enough to get them so they ain’t keen enough to provide.

Among 12 confirmed Bangladeshis who were killed on September 11, 2001 there are Mohammad Sadeque Ali, Shabbir Ahmed, Nurul Haque Miah, Nurul’s wife Shakila Yasmin, Mohammad Shahjahan, Mohammed Salahuddin Chowdhury, Abul Kashem Chowdhury, Navid Hossain, Osman Ghani and Ashfaq Ahmed. As the Bangladesh High Commission at United States has a confirmation of 12 victims, definitely there are two more names those I’ve failed to mention here. However all the mentioned 10 were the citizens of United States of America and except Ashfaq Ahmed, Navid Hossain & Osman Ghani, I can provide at least something about seven others.

Mohammad Sadeque Ali

Mohammad Sadeque Ali, 62, according to a former Bangladeshi diplomat Syed Muazzem Ali, was a newspaper vendor. He lived in New York’s Jackson Heights with his wife Mumtaz. During the attack Ali was at Lower Manhattan presumably somewhere too-close-to or inside the World Trade Center and was later never found.

Shabbir Ahmed

Shabbir Ahmed

Shabbir Ahmed, 47, worked in the famous ‘Windows on The World’ restaurant on the 106th floor of the WTC North Tower. Migrated to US from Bangladesh in 1981, he loved the job he had in ‘Windows on The World’ and he stayed there for 11 years. Ahmed was married to Jeba and the couple had three children. Ahmed became able to meet his dream of sending all of them for college education. At the time of Ahmed’s death, a son named Tanvir was 16-year old and a daughter that went to Brooklyn College were 19-year old. The family’s home is at Marine Park, Brooklyn, New York. At the time a plane penetrated the tower, Ahmed was at work in his beloved workplace with 89 other coworkers including Mohammed Salahuddin Chowdhury, another Bangladeshi employee in there, reportedly were serving 76 guests; none of the people survived.

Mohammad Shahjahan

Mohammad Shahjahan

Mohammad Shahjahan, 41, lived with his wife Mansura at Spring Valley, a neighborhood at the border of towns Ramapo and Clarkstown at Rockland County, New York. He was a Computer Administrator in the professional service provider & insurance brokerage farm Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc. (MMC)., which held offices between floors 93 & 100, the ultimate impact zone of the attack. 295 employees including Shahjahan and two other Bangladeshis, Nurul Haque Miah & Shakila Yasmin, were working at MMC at the time of attack; among them nobody survived.

Abul Kashem Chowdhury

Abul Kashem Chowdhury

Abul Kashem Chowdhury, 30, was 2nd generation Bangladeshi-American, child of a former Bangladeshi diplomat. He resided in New York with his family of his wife, parents, a brother and two sisters. A College of Staten Island graduate, Chowdhury was about to pursue a career on computer expertise, which even he had one at financial services farm Cantor Fitzgerald L.P. as a Senior Assistant Analyst. His brother Abul Qaiser Chowdhury said that he and his brother worked to support their family; have been like two arms to their loved ones. During the attack Chowdhury was on the 103rd floor, who even called his brother after the plane made the hit and he was approaching to come down, but the communication was tragically brief and everything was finished in hours. Months before the attack Chowdhury got married to Young Kim, a 2nd generation Korean-American. Kim, remarking his husband as a ‘devoted moviegoer’, was about to go to movies with him after work on the fateful day.

Mohammed Salahuddin Chowdhury

Mohammad Salahuddin Chowdhury

Mohammed Salahuddin Chowdhury, 38, was a Queens, New York resident where he lived with his wife Baraheen Ashrafi. Salahuddin, a Dhaka University physics graduate, migrated to US in 1987. In US he studied real-estate and also obtained a diploma in Computer Science. Initially he worked in Baltimore but later came to New York for something better would come up. He decided to stay in New York in anyways so he started working in the famous ‘Windows on The World’ restaurant as a waiter. Salahuddin & Baraheen had a 6-year old boy. In the time of attacks Baraheen was pregnant and was due to operate at late hours of the fateful date. In fact Salahuddin usually attended the work in evening hours but that day chose to serve in the morning so that he could stay with his wife to the operation. Farqad Chowdhury, born 48-hours after deadly attack took away his father with 88 other coworkers, has been perhaps one of the first 9/11 orphans to be born. HBO’s 9/11 documentary “In Memoriam: New York City, 9/11/01” has covered the tragic fate of Salahuddin’s family.

Nurul Haque Miah

Nurul Haque Miah

Nurul Haque Miah, 35, was born in Bangladesh to an immensely pious family in 1966. A mid-80s immigrant to US, Nurul started working for Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc., (MMC) in 1986. In 1999 he married Shakila Yasmin; an early-90s immigrant whom he met in a friend’s wedding in 1995 & dated for 5 years. Nurul had a very good reputation at work & was awarded as recognition of merit in MMC. Nurul studied and had a degree in audiovisual technology, as the final position he had in MMC was an Audiovisual Technologist where he worked for 15 years. Nurul’s workplace was on the 93rd floor. But during the attack he was in a meeting on the 99th floor, while his wife Shakila, also an MMC employee, was on the 97th floor; MMC was a tenant holding 8 floors from 93rd to 100th. To mention, all these floors got the worst impact after the plane made hit especially the floors 93th-99th through where the plane actually penetrated, let as assume Nurul and his wife to be two of the very initial victims of the deadly attack.

Shakila Yasmin

Shakila Yasmin

Shakila Yasmin, 26, wife of Nurul Haque Miah, went to US with her parents Sharif A. Chowdhury and Shawkat Ara Sharif when she was 16. She did her S.S.C in Bangladesh and in US got admitted in Wakefield High School in Arlington, Virginia. Obtaining US citizenship in the sixth year of stay, she graduated from Virginia Commonwealth University in 1999 with a degree of Management Information Systems. As told before, she was married to Nurul Haque Miah in 1999, joined her husband’s workplace MMC as a Computer Assistant one year prior to the deadly attack. She was on the 93rd floor when the first plane penetrated the building.

Renaming Brooklyn Streets after Shakila and Nurul

Shakila Yasmin and Nurul Haque Miah

Nurul and Shakila lived in Brooklyn, New York and they had a very good relationship with the neighbors. One of their neighbors Diane Hunt, touched by her neighbors’ tragic deaths, took an initiative to propose renaming of the street in Brooklyn in names of Shakila and Nurul, took the matter to the city council. At her proposition and consent from the fellow councilors, the Mayor of New York City Michael Bloomberg (world’s 8th richest man, the Republican politician who owns Bloomberg L.P) passed a bill 746-A on 29 December, 2005 that renamed a total 67 streets of New York, including the Evington Avenue and the Third Avenue in Brooklyn those got the new name “Shakila Yasmin & Nurul Haque Miah 9-11 Memorial Way”. Mayor Bloomberg, fellow New Yorker Hunt and others who consented in paying respect to our fallen countrymen are yet to receive gratitude officially from Bangladesh. You know we have a lot of real works to do than just go thanking people like recently dead Senator Ted Kennedy who was singled out in US Senate just for talking for Bangladesh in 1971, or the Jewish NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg who honored Bangladesh by naming streets whereas he could choose from people of 59 other nationalities.

M. Tawsif Salam
23 August, 2009. Dhaka.

Majority of the Bangladeshi cricket fans no matter in times of disappointment or pleasure, rarely have denied the fact that the national team contains skilled players required for a pleasant end of a game. It can be that people around have been disappointed immensely for a batsman’s getting out in almost the same way he gets out in most of the occasions; or the one which happens to be more usual for Bangladesh throughout the time that is sudden collapse of the batting order. But rarely has it been told that they couldn’t do because they weren’t meant to do.

However while talking about what they still need and is quite difficult to have, is the consistency of their better performances. In other sense and though it’s a fact that not necessarily a winning game is always the one with good cricket, we can interpret that one of the things the tigers were still looking for has been the consistency of winning. Bangladesh’s consecutive outfighting of Zimbabwe and West Indies can be taken to set up as what we repeatedly call Bangladesh team to have required for years.

Beside good cricket from both the sides a better contribution from the neutral part of the game also seems as a mandatory, which Shane Warne has recently appeared to be concerned about. Recently he was found to lambaste the present day umpiring stating, “The standard of umpiring is as low as I’ve known it in 20 years.” Well, let not just take few disputable decisions to specify a general deterioration. Especially in case of relating the matter with time, it has to be accepted that the advanced use of an advanced technology have made some stuffs quite outcast and mistakes at the grounds are now exposed in a better way. But what really makes us take seriously that are consecutively disputed decisions from certain umpires have very scant record of accountabilities or dramatic improvement.

It really hurts to accommodate any criticism about the ultimate decider of the game in a post-game talk. But talks really do favor in such situations where it sometimes turns to be unbearable and an explication comes up as precedence.

For example we must not mind if Asoka De Silva’s umpiring is brought to attention to at least some extent. Bangladesh team already has received unexpected damages by what appeared to have been disputable decisions of the Sri Lankan umpire. Bangladesh’s tours to Pakistan in 2003 and to West Indies this year are the noted ones.

Asoka as a cricketer has however been impressive in his test debut where he bowled stood nearly as a solid obstacle on ways of the Indian scorers in Colombo back in 1985. As an umpire, well his decisions gave births to few notable flaps. Considering the fact that technology nowadays does even a cruder exposure of man’s mistakes at instance and instead of just regretting a sum of ‘regrettable’ decisions at the international level, there can be suggested a tradeoff between technological aspects and their acceptable contributions to evade any contentiousness among the people around.

Sunil Gavaskar once has regretted a fact which also we often do; that as the time has advanced it has took away what once was innocence in cricket they had back in their times. Gavaskar told Ayaz Memon on 10 July this year, “There was an innocence about the game when I was kid, which is perhaps not quite there now. I think I would prefer the innocence of the game that was there when I was a teenager.” Things take place which make us think in the same way too. Like, there was some sort of celebration among the fielders in the ground after an opponent batsman made a half-century. It ain’t like such things have disappeared nowadays, but the players are aware that the TV cameras are on them, according to Gavaskar.

After the 4th ODI of Bangladesh-Zimbabwe series in Bulawayo this year, Tamim Iqbal did set something easing Sunil Gavaskar and ourselves too. Charles Coventry’s spectacular 194 not-out ultimately came at nothing for Zimbabwe as Iqbal’s decisive 154 did it sealing the match for Bangladesh. It was the ‘Man of the Match’ trophy that Iqbal was co-chosen for with Coventry and it’s where our point lies. Tamim Iqbal, who’s steady and epic 154 won the match for Bangladesh, stated “I congratulated him (Coventry) and told him that he could keep the trophy. He deserved it… You don’t make world records every day. It was a truly magnificent innings.” That was a good one to ease us as well as Sunil Gavaskar; really a winning habit and else.

This has also been published in the 23 August, 2009 issue of Weekly Economic Times.

Prothom Alo and Daily Star. I actually don’t blame myself while being highly skeptical about two most notable newspapers of our country, because they practically were correlated to my association with blogging in past. I remember the role that Prothom Alo and Daily Star played amid the 1/11 misrule in fact when I started active blogging, where I and many other bloggers can quite rightfully state based upon facts that they were becoming the engineers to establish the public support for the 1/11 regime which appeared to have been having ill-motives against Bangladesh. Whenever we had a confusion about what the then ‘Lord of the Rings’ Gen. Moeen U. Ahmed were trying to say or do, we were used to read Prothom Alo or Daily Star editorials or others’ write-ups inside them. In fact their articles or news reports at that time were written in such way that Gen. Moeen and his conmen were being quite well explained.

Prothom Alo and Daily Star claim themselves to have the highest circulation among those of their competitors, which I don’t deny. And considering them as two leading newspapers of Bangladesh, they have so far faced handful of allegations which I believe no other leading newspaper in Bangladesh did and in most of the countries are too much rare to face. The series of allegations include with, being weapons to knock down their owner’s business rivals, being an unofficial media body to provide subsequent explications of an undemocratic and unlawful government’s series of ill-motivated steps etc. Deeds they did to viciously support the undemocratic 1/11 government should be enough to completely discourage number of people who could have respect on them as honest journalists.

What Salman F. Rahman today has told, I consider it to be his right to defend himself if someone throws dirt to him. We remember that after the unlawful grab attempt of a Gulshan Avenue residential building by group of people claiming themselves to be conmen of Mahfuzur Rahman holding a signboard which says “This Property Belongs to ATN Bangla”, Salman F. Rahman being a relative to the actual owner of the building got involved in the case to support his family member, and that was the beginning of a series of ATN Bangla reports against both Salman F. Rahman and BEXIMCO. As similar sort of allegations have come forward about Prothom Alo and Daily Star for a number of times before, we cannot mark someone to be completely without logic if he says a same affair might have taken place between Salman F. Rahman and Prothom Alo & Daily Star. More importantly, according to Daily Star editor Mahfuz Anam’s claim that they are committed to present substantial news to their readers, Prothom Alo and Daily Star were supposed to carry out at least a follow-up of the Gulshan Avenue flap, which they eventually didn’t do. So Prothom Alo and Daily Star’s general claim having ‘social responsibilities’ eventually becomes arguable.

I just can put a shortlist of their assistances. Incidentally and now I feel it was most unfortunate that it were Prothom Alo and Daily Star who gave me the first details of the 1/11 coup d’état. However as the 1/11 regime accommodate some tasks in their plans those where necessary for the harmonious run of a state, distinctive parts of their plans can be marked as they were not completely malicious. These not-malicious plans are often chosen to state that “1/11 also did some good things”. These ‘good things’ were given good coverage by Prothom Alo and Daily Star which I don’t think to be disappointing, and to some extent I was not suspecting about their roles or any of its appeared-to-be-association with the 1/11 government till those moments. But after the 1/11 government was on its political plans like minus-1/2, gagging major parties, creating king’s factions in name of reformists, forcing media to filter presentations, torturing journalists, politicians, teachers, students etc., I attentively noticed that Prothom Alo and Daily Star were being at very effective assistance where number of stories were being made to help the government have a convinced group of people and an apparent public support to their position completely against the ongoing political system. Following this notice, my delivery boy was told that no Prothom Alo and Daily Star should be seen in my house any further. Yes, I subscribed both and I unsubscribed both.

Now, one can ask if I have made detached from two newspapers. Well I haven’t been detached. When any important issue takes place and becomes attention of the majority media, I become curious about what role Prothom Alo & Daily Star are playing and I get in touch with their online edition. In fact their apparent apathy on the grab attempt on that Gulshan Avenue residential building came by my eyes when I specially checked that what’ve been their remark about allegation on their partial media partner (as ATN Bangla and Daily Star works together online in some cases) ATN Bangla in that illegal operation.

Anyways, about the beginning of 1/11, their reports really gave me and most of their readers an idea that the 10 January late night at Bangabhaban was really a scene full of merriness where D. Iajuddin Ahmed laterally handed over the state-running scepter to hands of the then military chief Gen. Moeen U. Ahmed. In fact the book written by Gen. Moeen U. Ahmed almost echoed what was reported by those newspapers on January 11, 2007. These ‘truths’ started being differed after other officials of Bangabhaban who were present during the overthrow and who were notable ‘non-military’, started to open mouths. Claims of the then Press Secretary of the President hint that Bangabhaban that night was an exact stereotype of how a presidential palace becomes amid a coup d’état; military officials in every rooms, regular house officials with faces like they were looking at ghosts, raiding military officials threatening Bangabhaban officials, officials getting to the President with prepared papers and having them signed etc. As the topic Press Secretary has come, I must mention that Syed Fahim Munaim, who was chosen as the Press Secretary to Dr. Fakhruddin Ahmed, was a Daily Star official prior to his appointment to the Chief Advisor’s office.

Incidentally the political targets of the 1/11 regime have been interesting matches with Prothom Alo and Daily Star targets to be defamed with series reports, substantial or insubstantial. Now those newspapers can defend this that the matches have been coincidental or they were simply doing the duties of ideal journalists. But we, the people who read those (at least once have read) newspapers, have opportunities of their analysis and do know that there exists a term called ‘yellow journalism’, won’t like to be fed and satisfied with these fancy ‘social responsibility’ explanations. People will play with the facts. And the claim that Prothom Alo and Daily Star were party to the promotion of unconstitutional and unlawful regime does have facts to back.

At least this has to be appreciated that Salman F. Rahman stood vocal against Prothom Alo and Daily Star despite many of their targets simply had things forgone or dealt by other means. I will expect that the information that Rahman provided have been substantial. For sake of better acceptability of the claims Salman F. Rahman has made, I will suggest that the matter should be taken to the court as soon as possible so that there can be set an exemplary judicial action against Prothom Alo and Daily Star, if Rahman’s claims are found evident. I also wish courage to the honorable judges that before ensuring justice against the practice of any illegitimate journalism, they will overcome the uneasiness of possibilities that they also can become suitable targets of Prothom Alo and Daily Star.

M. Tawsif Salam
19 July, 2009, Dhaka

Group of responsible personalities including government people and the Indian diplomat, have been showing unpalatable stubbornness over the Tipaimukh Dam issue.

Dr. Dipu Moni’s remark about Indian High Commissioner Pinak Ranjan Chakravarty that he breached a diplomat’s code of conduct was not her first remark to be considered as a flap. She received spectacular criticisms after forgoing an Indian journalist who marked Bangladesh as a ‘buffer state’ in a press conference presided by her. People from the top brass of present Awami League government power structure have set some more examples of being kind to forgo a couple of must-protest commentaries of people associated with India. The most recent one was Dipu Moni’s presence in a seminar where Indian High Commissioner added the adjective ‘so-called’ while naming Bangladeshi experts, especially those who are critical to India’s unpopular Tipaimukh dam. After the Chakravarty’s flawless conduct, BNP’s lawmaker Adv. Mahbubuddin Khokon, who is also BNP’s sole representative to the parliamentary body for foreign affairs, demanded immediate expulsion of the rowdy diplomat.

Following Khokon’s demand, Dr. Dipu Moni’s popular remark about Chakravarty’s breaching the code of conduct was almost covering up the controversy that she caused by her silence against humiliation of Bangladesh. Now, it’s to be noted that Dr. Dipu Moni became a part of several events where she received criticisms by either her humiliating silence, or her apparent incompetence to put thrashing replies against what it’s been insulting remark against Bangladesh; and throughout all these Awami League’s attention to her activities never became public. But at a certain point Awami League top brass became really tensed about her statements and took no time to differ what she told about the rowdy diplomat. After no time from Dr. Dipu Moni became coldly vocal about Chakravarty’s rowdiness, Awami League’s spokesperson and the Minister of Local Government and Cooperatives Syed Ashraful Islam said that he at no point thinks that Chakravarty has breached a diplomat’s code of conduct.

Ramesh Sen, the Minister of Water Resources, has done most of the contributions to the series of erratic speeches over Tipaimukh Dam issue. The recent of his performances has been utterly denying that Begum Khaleda Zia has ever sent a letter to the Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina. Khaleda Zia’s letter to the Prime Minister over her concerns about Tipaimukh has been covered by entire of the media, which our minister Ramesh Sen has confidently denied to have ever taken place.

The Tipaimukh Dam issue has seen more passes than sometimes satirically presented Dutch ‘total football’ could ever have produced or suggested. We don’t know who were midfielders, attackers or defenders, but the passes have been subsequently carried out by the Ministries of Foreign Affairs, Water Resources, and Environment & Forest, without much of the senses of their particular roles. Whenever the responsible individuals received stern quizzes about the issue, they either kept passing it to other offices, or made remarks those are solely enough to humiliate the sovereignty of a nation.

The Minister of Commerce Col. Faruk Khan, who in accordance with his official functions wasn’t supposed to be concerned with the issue, claimed all of a sudden that the Bangladeshi experts who are being critical to Tipaimukh issue don’t know anything. Following his statement, Chakravarty made two subsequent comments; one is that the protest against Tipaimukh issue was politically ill-motivated, and the other is no laws on earth could bar India from building Tipaimukh dam. Quoting Chakravarty, Minister of Communication Abul Hossain also told the protest against Tipaimukh dam is insubstantial. Minister of Water Resources Ramesh Sen, who did something more serious than a quotation, told that if there is any negative impact of Tipaimukh dam, Bangladesh should concede the damages at least for sake of the alliance with her greater neighbor.

As it has been told earlier, this series of comments is solely enough to humiliate the sovereignty of a nation. The present government as well as the ruling party, and most importantly Syed Ashraful Islam who was in a hurry to reestablish the submissiveness of his government to the Indian authority by differing Dr. Dipu Moni’s cold protest within hours, should get the note that friendship cannot be imposed. You just cannot pick up a group of people and ask them to recite “Bangladesh and India are friends”, who already are holding newspapers with headlines of Bangladeshi frontier population body-counts to the BSF bullets. Or, you cannot just ask people to accept long-lasting damages just for sake of alliance with a nation which appoints ‘so-called’ diplomats to meddle in our internal politics and humiliate our sovereignty.

People won’t accept speeches from a minister like Ramesh Sen hints to sacrifice Bangladeshi resources for sake of India’s friendship, or of lawmakers like Abdur Razzaq states Bangladesh can make up her desertification by importing Tipaimukh produced power; hence Bangladesh can accept both her desertification and Indian bills just to have power produced in Tipaimukh. These comments hint their loyalties being to something else than the sovereignty of Bangladesh.

This post has also been published at Weekly Economic Times, 26 July, 2009 issue.

From left: Gen. Moeen U. Ahmed, Brig-Gen. Fazlul Bari, Maj-Gen. A.T.M Amin, Lt-Gen. Masud Uddin Chowdhury

Although Gen. Moeen U. Ahmed claimed his 11 January, 2007 unlawful intervention to be something other than a typical coup d’état, the significance of his acts have been too crudely typical. Almost all of the initiatives he took were typical; saving the nation from a nearing ‘civil war’, proposition of all out political reformation, crackdown over corruption etc. Actually there don’t remain a lot more cover-ups that a military ruler can use to defend his outspoken unlawfulness. So the mentioned lollypops were the instruments Gen. Moeen used to form up a façade of his unconstitutional and unlawful regime, suspending the fundamental rights those the people of an independent sovereign state can expect to have.

I’ve heard many people to claim the events of early January 2007 could have triggered a civil war in Bangladesh. It’s highly arguable that whether crying out the imminence of a civil war was really a substantial speculation or was just an excuse to overthrow a uniform government. Such excuses can eventually leave us skeptical because although adversary political activists took the streets no matter whatever ratio they had, no parts of the belligerents were recognized to have ‘military’ wings to drive through a ‘civil war’. At least Gen. Moeen U. Ahmed surely was not a Patton or a Monty to ‘give a chop’ to everything within a night that could have instrumented a countrywide civil war. So probably it was just an excuse to be used to form the public image of the setup that Moeen U. Ahmed with his errand men appeared to have done.

Moeen, however, had to be at good terms with the Indian authority. To mention, his relationship with India has been considerably better than any other military leaders of Bangladesh, becoming the only Bangladesh Army Chief of Staff to be befriended by India's far-right political masterminds.

Now for sake of arguments, I can be looked for to be asked, should Moeen have waited for the civil war getting truly imminent? Well I like to rule out the issue of a civil war, because for a country like Bangladesh which took less than 20 years from her birth to take the track of a consistent democracy, which in fact has had democracy smoothly and praiseworthily running for 16 long years, a civil war just for two conflicting political parties happens to be too fictitious. In fact as a country recognized to have moderate political and religious views, the civil war issue should have been taken as an insult to Bangladesh.

It’s arguable that whether the sudden intervention, or let me say the 1/11 coup d’état can be justified considering the then situation. Some or many people haven’t been disappointed after completely unlawful and unconstitutional sudden intervention of a man and suspension of people’s fundamental rights for indefinite period of time. People haven’t been disappointed at once because they were confused that whether they had lived better in past couple of months in the then atmosphere. Series of street agitations and two party’s being distant everyday turned Bangladeshi politics to severe disarray. Senior leaders of both the parties were set to negotiate and work a solution out but they could give nothing but smiles after they met. So the series of violence and an almost stalemate of Bangladesh, they have been failure of politicians, not politics. But after taking over the state machine what Gen. Moeen U. Ahmed was after has not been just politicians, he was after politics along with all the apparatuses he could have had a control over, legitimately or else.

We often see commentators among us who appear to have allergies of a system other than democracy, especially if it comes as a subject to military takeover of the state machine. Certain class of people now suddenly appear to be looking for rooms to thank Gen. Moeen at for least something he did. After considerably a protracted quest, its told that whatsoever Moeen U. Ahmed once initiated, have come to an end by resuming the democratic process, so he is to be thanked. In fact a military ruler who overthrew a uniform authority which was a party to state’s democratic process, if can be that fortunate ending up by resuming the democratic process, righteously can be considered as something better than just money lending, thus deserves a Novel Peace Prize.

However the Sheikh Hasina government does contain some of Awami League personalities who will like to give these kingpins real hard time.

But the immediate next democratic government of Moeen’s 1/11 rule didn’t act in the way that of a Novel Peace Prize contender should have acted. Ordinances the 1/11 cabinet once passed, the democratic government turned them into laws. Breaching of the constitutions the 1/11 regime frequently did, the democratic government desperately avoids to sue those matters. Not only has this, a cabinet member at the government of Moeen’s ‘resumed’ democracy, stated that Moeen U. Ahmed has been an Abraham Lincoln in the context of Bangladesh. It’s merely unbelievable that how a person under whose command politicians were tortured, university teachers were jailed and tortured, under whose command the fundamental rights of people were suspended, under whose command journalist was beaten half to death for criticizing him, can be compared with Abraham Lincoln. And it appears things won’t remain up to just comparison with great statesmen. Instead of dealing with the allegations, instead of suing for ousting democracy and hundred more criminal offenses at least attributed to have been done, there have been authoritative talks that there can be rewards for. And eventually this reward part, though haven’t taken place yet, explains everything.

*****

This post has also been published in The Weekly Economic Times, 21 June, 2009 issue.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Originally Published on: Onnesha.TK

Tipaimukh Dam. It is clear that it will put it's adverse effect on Surma and Kushiara as well as other rivers of Bangladesh too.

The Indians are going ahead with the construction of the massive Tipaimukh barrage-this events collectively impinge on us in more than one ways but the one which directly affects our very ability to survive is the issue of water-sharing of some 53 common rivers between India and Bangladesh. By constructing Tipaimukh and other barrages, India is depriving us of life-giving waters, drastically reducing our ability to survive and therefore this is the issue needing immediate and continued public attention and the subject of this commentary. India has resumed construction of the Tipaimukh barrage on the Barack river just a kilometer north of Jakiganj in Sylhet; the construction work was stalled in March 2007 in the face of protests within and outside India. The barrage when completed in 2012 is supposed to provide 1500 megawatts of hydel power to the Indian state of Assam but in return its going to bring about a major disaster for Bangladesh, practically contributing to drying up of 350 km long Surma and 110 km long Kushiara rivers which water most of the north-eastern regions of Bangladesh. The Tipaimukh barrage is going to seriously affect not only agriculture in large portions of Bangladesh, particularly in winter, but is also going to bring about negative ecological, climatic and environmental changes of vast areas in both Bangladesh and India.

Indian government is constructing the dam without consultation with Bangladesh government, which is violation of International River Law. Three crores people of the northern and eastern parts of the country would be vulnerable seriously when the construction of the dam would be completed by 2012.

It’s not just this one Indian barrage that is a source of considerable concern and trepidation in Bangladesh; in 1976 India put into operation the Farraka Barrage which more or less destroyed the Ganges-Brahamaputra Basin, most of which lies in the deltaic plains of Bangladesh and in 1990 India also constructed a barrage along the Teesta river thereby virtually making ineffective much of the Teesta barrage project constructed down-stream in Bangladesh to support irrigation and agriculture in the north-west region of the country. What is even more worrying is that India has evolved plans to divert waters, from the north of the country to its drought-prone southern and eastern states, of some 53 river which flow from India to Bangladesh.

Bangladesh shares a common border with India in the west, north and east and with Myanmar in the southeast. These borders cut across 57 rivers which discharge through Bangladesh into the Bay of Bengal in the south. The upstream courses of these rivers traverse India, China, Nepal and Bhutan. Trans-boundary flows, which enter Bangladesh from remote catchments extending short distance to thousands of kilometers upstream, are the important source of water resources.

Bangladesh gets 7 to 8 percent of its total water from the Barak in India’s northeastern states. Millions of people are dependent on hundreds of water bodies, fed by the Barak, in the Sylhet region for fishing and agricultural activities.

Environmentalists in Bangladesh have held many talks on the adverse impact of the proposed dam. They say the dam would dry up the river and the water bodies in the downstream, leaving millions jobless and upsetting the ecological balance.

Among the trans-boundary rivers, the ones most affected by Indian barrages and their related systems of canals, reservoirs and irrigation schemes are Ganges, Brahmaputra, Meghna and Teesta. Although the Indian and Bangladeshi governments have a water sharing agreement for the Ganges, there are none for the other 53 rivers that cross the border. With the Tipaimukh barrage now underway, India seems to be going ahead with its mega-project of diverting river waters from its north to its south and east, thereby putting Bangladesh’s very survival at stake.India is taking unilateral decisions about matters which affect Bangladesh’s core interests and if these cannot be resolved bilaterally, Bangladesh must look at options of going to multilateral forums such as the UN to get its right not only recognized but also implemented. International laws dealing with water-sharing of common rivers and sources are ambiguous, unclear and contentious and so, Bangladesh ought to vigorously pursue these matters, perhaps even garner international support for a change in those laws dealing with water-sharing – this international dimension is a crucial factor affecting the management of the trans-boundary river systems. There is thus, no scope for Bangladesh to be deflected from this core issue of water-sharing notwithstanding Indian deceitful and diversionary insistence and propaganda on “terrorists and transit”.

The Indian high commissioner has admitted that a dam will be built on the proposed Tipaimukh hydropower project over the cross-boundary river Barak but said it will not harm Bangladesh. (But I don’t know how? You will put a barrage in the river and it will not affect the nature???)

The Tipaimukh hydropower project was not like the Farakka irrigation project. A little amount of water will be diverted to produce hydroelectricity and the water will be released soon, Pinak Ranjan Chakravarty said. (So he agreed that Farakka Barrage is a problem for Bangladesh. And saying that Tipaimukh will not be like that! But how Bangladesh would beleive it? India previously said many thing abouthis Farakka Barrage. But ultimately Bangladesh is suffering from it. So how will we beleive that you are talking truth? And one barrage must put it’s adverse effect on nature. And the position of the Barrage clearly indicates that Bangladesh will offcourse suffer with this project. It will be a destructive project for Bangladesh. We must protest it now!)

Bangladesh should not be wary of the project, he told.

He said bilateral discussions have long been on-going on the project. Indian government has invited Bangladesh to see the dam site and its design, Chakravarty said. A Bangladeshi organisation, International Farakka Committee, demanded suspension of ‘construction of Tipaimukh barrage’ and rightful share of the Indian river Ganges.

The organisation called upon the United Nations to form a regional river commission involving China, Nepal, Bhutan and Bangladesh.

Government of Bangladesh and people of Bangladesh must be aware of this project from now and must have to protest. It will come as a destructive project for Bangladesh. bangladesh will become desert if the project is completed. India is using their power to complete this destructive project. They are trying to giving wrong ideas to Bangladesh as they given at the time of constructing Farakka Barrage. They are doing the same thing here. We all now that how Bangladesh is suffering because of this Farakka Project. How our Bangladesh is affected by the Farakka Barrage. We don’t want to see more destruction in bangladeshi economy and nature. We must protest. And it is the time. Bangladeshis must be aware of this from now and this is the only way to safe our beautiful country Bangladesh.

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