|
EDITORIAL
Transparent governance
Among a good number of creditable steps adopted by the Army-backed caretaker government the most worthy one is the repeated affirmation and reiteration by Army Chief General Moeen U. Ahmed that the Army has no intention of capturing state power.
To look back, obduracy emanating from irrationality engenders terrible adversity resulting in doom. Ceaseless wrangling between the leaders and activists of the two major political parties- Awami League and BNP - had dragged the nation on the verge of a fratricidal civil war and horrific bloodshed. Indeed, a doomsday scenario was sure to ensue had there been no intervention from the Army. Most of the citizens are in their own way patriots unless it is proved to be otherwise. But viewed from the context of profession, mission and vision patriotism of the Armed Forces is beyond question.
It needs no elaboration that the 9/11 changeover has been hailed by the people as a boon and it has been possible only because it is backed by the Army without which the interim Caretaker government (CG) could not function.
Though the oft-talked about the amorphous concept of ‘minus two’ —- suggesting expulsion of Khaleda Zia and Shiekh Hasina from politics —- is still heard, any attempt to debar them from doing politics through coercive means will be wrong. The electorate alone can decide their leaders’ acceptability, as was the case with Indira Gandhi who was defeated in 1976, paving the way for Morarji Desai.
However, by now some have voluntarily retired from politics, and intra-party reform agenda has been taken seriously by Amir Hossain Amu, Suranjit Sen Gupta and Tofail Ahmed in the Hasina led Awami League. Though in politics there is no age bar anywhere, Hasina’s edict for retirement after reaching 60, AL leaders has been seen as a dog in the manger policy. This stance has infuriated most of the old guards except Sajeda and Motia. On the other hand, BNP secretary general Abdul Mannan Bhuiya seems to have gained the support of a significant number of reformist leaders notwithstanding Khaleda Zia’s caution to go by the party’s constitution and a council session attended by grassroots level leaders. To call a spade a spade, neither Hasina nor Khaleda was supportive of democratisation in the party, and council meeting of the two parties remained suspended for over a decade now. For a healthy growth of politics free from dynastic type, councillors should elect party chief through secret ballot - and not by raising hand. After all, the stable has to be cleared.
While parlour politics of the parties will facilitate freer discussions among leaders on various reforms, former BNP leader Ferdous Qureshi’s move to form a new party is being seen as irresolute, halting development. He has pulled together a large number of politicians drawn from different parties, but it has to be seen if they are all ‘clean’ people. It is yet to be known what course will Dr. Kamal Hossain follow, but as regards LDP led by Dr. B. Chowdhury and Col. (retd.) Oli Ahmed - who were wrangling over ascendancy - the party is no longer in a terra firma.
Since the people are given to believe that the CG is apolitical with the chief agenda to hold a free and fair election, it will earn people’s support if the task is accomplished with due earnestness within the timeframe it has now set for itself. Last but not least, it will be worthwhile to form an administration, which will ensure absolute transparency in governance and a foolproof corruption-free society for a good future.
 ^ TOP OF THIS PAGE ^ MAIN PAGE
‘Bush-man’ Blair becomes new
Mid-East ‘Peace ‘Envoy’
AMM Shahabuddin
As soon as he quitted 10 Downing Street after serving as Britain’s Labour Prime Minister for long ten years, Tony Blair found himself already decorated as “peace envoy” in the Middle East. He was selected by the Quartet – the US, UN, European Union (EU) and Russia- to carry on the US-led peace operation in the Middle East, the two boiling points being Iran and Palestine. Making his first comments on his new role as a peacemaker (as he had already gathered tons of experience in his peace operation in Iraq under the guidance of his ‘friend, philosopher and guide’, President Bush), Blair said that it was “a huge challenge” for him and he would have “to prepare the ground for a negotiated settlement” and the “key” to that was “to prepare the Palestinians for statehood.”
As morning shows the day, Blair had shown where the journey begins and that is, in short, to prepare the Palestinians for statehood as if the ignorant and illiterate Palestinians and their leaders do no understand what an independent state meant for which they had been fighting for the last several decades at the heavy cost of lives and properties against the US-pampered Israel. However, a later clarification by Bush seems to have restricted Blair’s sphere of peace operations. Perhaps the picture will be clear as Blair starts washing the ‘dirty linen’ of the Palestine issue in public.
Although there has been no reaction being heard from the Sheikhs, Presidents, Prime Ministers and other leaders of the Arab World, not to speak of the immobile Arab League on Blair’s Middle East peace-mission, the British press had shown their reserved support to Blair. The popular Labour Party daily, The Mirror, expressed doubt about the capability of Blair in it editorial entitled “Right Man for the job?.” The question mark on the title speaks volumes. Pointing out that Bill Clinton would have been a better choice for the job, the daily that “even our moderate Arab allies say that Blair’s credibility in the region is in pieces”. If that is the view of the “moderate Arab allies” of the West, then what can be expected from others who are not so “moderate Arab allies?”
No ‘Poodle’ of Bush?
Now Bush had done something “to purify” Blair which he couldn’t find time to do during the last four years. Both Bush and Blair had paid visits to the Pope in Rome to get his blessings to wash off the heavy burden of their accumulated sins committed during the Iraq war and post-war peace operation. During this long period, Bush had carried his pet “poodle” sometime on his shoulder and sometimes in his hip-pocket. Now after ‘purification’ by the Holy Pope, Bush had brought down his ‘poodle’, saying the other day, that Blair “is not so,” adding that ‘he is bigger than that.” So Bush had made Blair overnight “bigger” than his life size by making him the West’s ‘peace envoy’ in the Middle East.
In a sense Blair has been a better choice considering his British background and the inter-relationship between Britain, Palestine and Israel, although there are many like a ME political analyst Orieb al-Rintasi who had dubbed Blair as “a biased lackey” of Bush and as such his appointment as a peace envoy “would not serve the peace process as he was not a neutral party.” At least his new role would expose whether he follows what his political predecessors had done decades back by creating the state of Israel by ousting the Palestinians from their home land, or takes a sensible course to correct the past misdeeds and allow the Palestinians to have their own homeland free from foreign influence; not as a charity from Israel but as a matter of right.
When history serves as a beacon light, nobody can deny what history unfolds as to who were at the ‘roots’ that pushed the Jews, a minority community constituting only 34 per cent of the mainland Palestine’s total population of two million with overwhelming Arab majority.
The first nail to Palestinian statehood (or coffin?) was hit by the British government, through its historic Balfour declaration that assured the Jews of Palestine of their own state, in recognition of the huge financial assistance provided by a British Jew business magnate in Britain’s war efforts. It ultimately took a concrete shape of a state of Israel that came into existence in 1947 and it became a member of the UN in 1948, at the cost of the poor Palestinians who are still moving around with begging bowls for their survival. Even after formal declaration of independence in 1988, by the Palestine National Council (PNC), it has not been able to get UN membership as an independent state. The tragedy is that Palestine is still officially called ‘Palestine Authority”, and not “Palestine State” or “Palestine Government.” The Palestinians are now living as refugees in their own home land under the whims of Israel. What a tragedy! How far Blair can push his ‘peace-mission’ in the Middle East with his blood soaked hands? To quote Bush, Palestinian statehood “is still a vision” and some commentators even consider an independent Palestine state as “still a pie in the sky.” Can Blair now turn Bush’s “vision” into reality? Or, what began with the hitting of the first nail by colonial Britain has now been given the last nail by the neo-colonialist America to strengthen its ‘road-map’ for peace in the Middle East.
The Anglo-American champions of peace and democracy, joined by clapping EU, had already turned the whole of Mid-East as their new ‘green pasture’, to use as their ‘play-ground’ for war games. To achieve this goal, they had already successfully created the ever widening rift between the Shias and the Sunnis in the post-war Iraq where they are now masterminding the teachings of democracy to the Iraqis to run their government. It is a good example of watering the plant after cutting its roofs!
America’s greatest shock
But the Americans had received the greatest shock of their life in Palestine where they encouraged their ‘picked-up’ man, President Abbas to hold election to smash the rising politico-military forces of Hamas by pro-Abbas party Al-Fatah. There the Hamas had turned the table upside down by winning majority of seats in the Assembly by defating the Al-Fatah party. Abbas allowed Hamas to form its government but was dismissed by him under mysterious circumstances to keep the pot boiling. Now America is trying to play a new game by involving Iran, which America considers as the only remaining “rogue” state, as the fomenter of troubles both in Iraq and Palestine with the help of Hizbullah militants who had already dealt a death blow to the Israeli forces when they invaded Lebanon, considered Hizbullah’s HQ to finish its militancy for ever.
Iran: Next Target?
In the midst of such turmoil, the neo-colonialists, led by US, are trying hard to add a third dimension to the Mid-East situation by poking their nose in Iran’s nuclear programme, branding it as producing nuclear bomb, which the Iranian vehemently deny by saying that they were only to generate energy for consumption by the Iranian people. The Iranian President Ahmedinejad had recently declared, dismissing the third bundle of sanctions now being brokered by America, that “Iran is already a nuclear country” and “it won’t back down.” Iran had also warned that if US moves ahead with ill motives, it would first use its “oil weapon” as a “deterrent measure”
America is also not so soft a nut to be cracked by Iran’s warnings. So US will keep up its search for new fault against Iran, the latest being that Iran had become a “training ground” for arming and financing Shia militants to kill the US soldiers in Iraq. So it won’t be surprising if one fine morning US-led forces attack Iran to destroy its nuclear capability to make the region free for them. So Iran is the vital issue on the US ‘menu’. Let the Gulf states be mentally prepared to refuse the military bases on their land by America for attacking Iran. Iran had forewarned the Gulf States in this respect.
At the conclusion it may be recalled what the Iranian Parliament Speaker Gholam Ali Adel had told the Gulf States. He reminded them that they had by now “learnt many lessons” from the US-led Iraq invasion, adding that the Arab state rulers “are not likely to link their fate with US mistakes.” Hopefully, this advice by an Iranian leader would not fall flat on deaf ears of the Arab States and they would be strong enough “to refrain from ‘kowtowing’ to President Bush and his gang. It is better to be forewarned, than to be caught napping.
A.M.M. Shahabuddin is a retired UN official.
^ TOP OF THIS PAGE ^ MAIN PAGE
VIEW POINT
Suranjit and 1972 Constitution
M.T. Hussain
It is nothing new from Suranjit Sengupta’s mouth his oft-repeated persistence for restoration of Bangladesh’s 1972 Constitution, as if all panaceas for all ills of Bangladesh lie in its restoration.
No constitution is a Bible or a sacred book that cannot be changed or amended. In fact and in reality, man-made constitutions are always subject to changes and amendments the provision of which is there in the Constitution itself. Thus it is only common rather than unusual that changes and amendments are made to keep up with the needs of time and contexts.
The Americans the Russians and other nations have amended their constitutions from time to time to suit their own needs and demands. Even the newly installed British Prime Minister Gordon Brown only the other day made his intention public to produce a written Constitution for the United Kingdom that traditionally is well known for not having a written constitution. These examples clearly show that with the passage of time there may be demand for changes and amendments to constitutions. There is nothing sacrosanct in having one and then keeping that unchanged eternally.
BAKSAL autocracy: The Bangladesh Constitution was framed after the independence and adopted on 4th November 1972. That did work for some time, but soon came the first amendment on 15th July 1973; then followed three more amendments in succession, until the fourth amendment of early 1975.
That means the Constitution had as many as four amendments in a period of about one and a half years. It matters little whether the amendments were good or bad; useless or worthwhile. The point is that man-made Constitution, like any human endeavour, cannot be inviolably sacrosanct but is always subject to changes. Be that as it may, what is sacrosanct to Suranjit about the 1972 Constitution of Bangladesh?
Fifth Amendment: If one would follow a bit carefully, it appears that Sengupta, from the core of his heart, nourishes deep hatred against the Fifth Amendment adopted in 1979 that incorporated changes and parted away from the principles of ‘Bangali nationalism’ and ‘secularism’ adopting instead “Bangladeshi Nationalism” [Art. 6(2)] and “Absolute trust and faith in Almighty Allah” (Art. 8-1A) respectively.
The amendments followed the changeover of 15th August 1975 and subsequent developments in power struggles in the country until the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution which was adopted in April 1979 and the full Constitution was restored for multi-party democracy to function.
There have been subsequent developments and other changes and amendments made so far all making their efforts to advance the country forward and not going back to the pre-1975 days of the one-party dictatorial rule of the BAKSAL variety. During the second term of Awami League [AL] rule from 1996 to 2001 there was ample scope for Sengupta as an MP to move the issue at Jatiya Sangsad and restore the 1972 Constitution; but we have no knowledge of Sengupta’s any effort. Perhaps his party AL was in no mood of going back to the 1972 Constitution. It is thus useless to talk about the issue of full restoration of the 1972 Constitution. However, as one may recall, Indian foreign affairs secretary Shib Shankar Menon stated that he wished to see secular Bangladesh. This, in other words, may mean abandonment of the Fifth Amendment. Well, Suranjit may still pursue his case for full restoration of the 1972 Constitution.
^ TOP OF THIS PAGE ^ MAIN PAGE
LETTERS
Price spiral: Govt. should operate wholesale markets
Dear Editor:
Recently one of the Advisers has blamed the businessmen for their non co-operation in bringing down the prices of the essentials despite the Government's effort and incentive provided to the traders and importers in the form of rebate in tariff. Therefore, I fully endorse the views expressed by the Adviser.
Time has now come to bring the unscrupulous traders under the purview of the Task Force. One cannot understand how the prices of vegetables in the wholesale market (Arat) in Karwanbazar become double in the retail market adjacent to it. It is the wholesalers who manipulate the market in their favour to maximize their profit at the cost of the general public. It was reported in the newspapers that a farmer gets the price of a normal size green bottle gourd (Kadu) at around Taka five each at grower's level, whereas the same gourd is being sold at Dhaka markets at Taka 20. It is the middlemen and the wholesalers (Aratdar) who take away the difference at the cost of the farmers and the consumers.
It is therefore, necessary for the Government to take over the operations of those wholesale markets perhaps at the initial period to be run by the BDR. After formulating a policy guideline and streamlining the distribution and storage networks throughout the country the operation could be gradually handed over to the registered cooperative societies only and not to any individual. The farmers should be encouraged to form their own cooperative societies for distribution and storage of their products. The Government should provide necessary finance in this respect. Businessmen have no respect or sympathy for the people and thrive on their undue profit motive only. Otherwise how do they use Formalin, DDT, chemicals, harmful dyes etc, on the fish, fruits and other food products which are virtually poisons. Our laws are too lenient and the businessmen are taking full advantage of such weakness in the law.
Mohammad Ataul Hoque,
Dhaka.
Difference between two governments
Dear Editor:
It is found that the present Caretaker Government is being compared by both the electronic and print media with that of General Musharraff's government in Pakistan. I personally differ.
Prior to 9/1, 2001 General Musharraff's government was literally on the verge of collapse whereas, prior to 1/11(2007) Bangladesh was passing through a critical phase, with civil war looming large over the horizon. Today, in Bangladesh there is sea change with unprecedent rise in foreign exchange, law and order situation is improving, the ports of Chittagong and Mongla --- now free from political influence --- are humming with activities round the clock; elections are on the anvil and the country is confidently marching towards progress and prosperity.
Can Pakistanis ever dream of such a situation under the present circumstances? The NATO Forces, Talibans and even the Al-Qaeda, with their various agenda are all ganging up to grab Pakistan for fighting on their side. In contrast our Look East policy helped Bangladesh build up warm and fraternal ties with both our immediate neighbours.
The bottom line is the Bangladesh Army was born during the War of Liberation in 1971 defeating the Pakistan forces and is not a free gift of the erstwhile colonial British Raj which Pakistan is.
Oways A Jamal,
Firozshah, Ctg.
Bureaucrats and corruption
Dear Editor:
True definition of corruption and anticorruption is probably mysterious'' in Bangladesh. Mostly the current CG is dealing with financial crimes rather than ''abuse of power''. That may expose only part of corruption, I am afraid. Hundreds of agreements with domestic and foreign companies and countries have been done by bureaucrats of our country in the Secretariat and other administrative offices for importing lower quality goods. Bribes are taken as in the form of facilitating the decision making officers' sons to immigrate to foreign countries.
These nonfinancial corruptions have been committed by politicians and bureaucrats jointly. But it's questionable why the latter are exempted from anticorruption drive. Half truth is more dangerous than a lie.
Secondly, lots of agreements are signed without considering the interest of our country at the expense of our country's interest.
We think anti-corruption drive by this CG could be more comprehensive rather than in a half -finished manner. We might not get the desired result. Nation wants to see the list of' "white collar criminals'' as well.
Dr Mohammad A Karim,
General practitioner,
Victoria, Australia.
CRP: A member’s monthly pay Tk.2.50
Dear Editor:
The Centre for Rehabi1itation of the Paralysed (CRP) was founded at Chapain, Savar in 1990. It started its journey in 1979 at an abandoned warehouse of the Suhrawardy Hospital with four patients only. It is now a 400-bed hospital for the physically disabled patients. At present it has five sub-centres viz. Ganakbari at Savar, Mirpur, Govindapur in Moulvibazar district, Manikganj and Nawabganj.
Its founder Miss Valerie A Taylor was born in England in 1944. She is a bachelor. She was accorded Bangladeshi citizenship on February 5, 1998. She was awarded Order of the British Empire (OBE) by the British government for her activities in humanitarian service to the physically handicapped. She also received National Social Service medal (2000), Dr. M. R. Khan and Anwar Trust Gold medal (2001), Hakkani Mission Bangladesh award (2001), Independence Day award (2004) and Rokey Shinning Personality Award (2005).
It is alleged that some people are conspiring to turn this voluntary institution into a commercial establishment for their evil interest. The trustee board removed Valerie Taylor from her position of co-ordinator though she is the founder of the CRP and has been with the institution since day one.
It is surprising to note that a member of the trustee board drew Tk.2.50 lakh as salary per month from this humanitarian organization, whereas CRP’s founder drew Taka 7,500 per month! National Professor Kabir Chowdhury, Maj Gen (retd) A. T. M. Abdul Wahab, Engineer S. M. Anwar Hossain, Mohammad Saidur Rahman and some other members of Nagoric Committee, a citizens’ group, recently demanded dissolution of trustee board and reinstatement of its founder Valerie Taylor to her post as co-ordinator.
The committee urged the Government to take necessary measures to eradicate ongoing mismanagement and corruption and form a fresh trustee board under full supervision of Taylor so that the poor physically ill-fated powerless people can continue receiving medical services and rehabilitation at a nominal cost. The committee also demanded immediate intervention of the Chief Adviser to the Caretaker Government.
None should be allowed to make any conspiracy to make this voluntary institution for humanitarian service a commercial one for personal interest.
A.M.K.Chowdhury,
West Masdhair, Narayanganj.
BMRE of BR needed
Dear Editor:
A Chittagong Dhaka passenger train running non-stop out of control due to drugging of drivers appears to be a new sabotage technique.
The question arises: What is the normal communication link between the driver of a running train and land-based control centres during the last 50 years, before mobile/cell telephones were in vogue and between the guard and the driver (inter-com)?
It shows the neglect of Bangladesh Railway (BR) by the successive government since 1972.
Now, are the drivers provided with mobile/cell telephone?
An urgent BMRE of Bangladesh Railway is called for. This sabotage came before the Asian Railway project and to smear the image of the Chittagong.
Engineer Md. Abad,
Dhaka.
ACC trials should be transparent
Dear Editor:
Anti-corruption drive launched by the present government is going on with high priority. The trials in the special tribunals dealing with ACC cases are also going on with unusual haste. People expect full transparency in the conduct of those trials.
Three-stage prosecution teasms have been announced by the government with high remuneration slabs with extra incentive bonus for them. Almost all the reputed lawyers in the country have been enlisted in the prosecution team. But we cannot understand how the government could ignore the helpless accused persons who also need help from the legal expertise in the country? But wherefrom will they get it?
It has been observed so long that the trials are being conducted unilaterally without giving any proper opportunity or importance to the available defence lawyers. And the convictions are pronounced as usual.
People deserves fair trial in the court of law and any prior direction or instruction is highly unfair and unjust. There must be transparency in this matter.
D. Gonzalbe,
Kallayanpur, Dhaka.
^ TOP OF THIS PAGE ^ MAIN PAGE
|
