This statement from Rahul Gandhi inherently makes it seem like the ‘dividing up of
However, it cannot be denied that
Thursday, May 3, 2007
Immaturity of Rahul Gandhi
by Tahmina Khanam and Mridul Chowdhury
India India and South Asia . We sincerely hope that in future, the words that he uses to discuss his family’s contributions would be more responsibly used.
Thursday, April 26, 2007
Time for Citizens to Step Up
by Mridul Chowdhury
Published in the Daily Star on Friday, April 27th, 2007:
http://www.thedailystar.net/2007/04/27/d704271503125.htm
I still remember the moment when I read in an email that Dr Yunus had announced his willingness to form a political party -- I was studying with a group of classmates who were left bewildered as I left the meeting abruptly -- too ecstatic to work on assignments in a confined room. I needed fresh air, and a moment of solitary reflection to internalize the new realities opening up in Bangladesh.
The source of my jubilation was the strong belief that Dr Yunus' entry into politics through forming Nagorik Shakti (NS) would undoubtedly usher in a new era of politics in Bangladesh; where the voices of those generally trampled upon would finally find an outlet, where new platforms would be created for progressive, honest and citizen-centric politics led by the youth and, most importantly, where the existing and emerging parties would strive to live upto the standards defined by NS.
Much to my continuing disappointment, Nagorik Shakti has yet to make a formal public emergence with clearly defined political ideologies. But the need for such a platform has increased many-fold, because of the recent attempts by the caretaker government to send to exile the leaders of the major parties of the country on the basis of flimsy justifications, and the swift reversal of their decision after pressure from the media and the civil society.
Many who initially embraced the new caretaker government's resolve to fight corruption, and welcomed the military's strong support in strengthening key democratic institutions, are now having second thoughts. What initially seemed like an effort to give power back to the citizens is now apprehended by many to be an effort to shift power from one group to another, leaving the citizens just as powerless and voiceless.
But what can we, the citizens, do under the circumstances? Should we wait to see which direction this caretaker government and the military take the country towards? Should we wait for our political leaders to take a stance? Should we wait for new parties like Nagorik Shakti to bring in fresh perspectives to politics? Perhaps not -- all of this calls for too much waiting.
We, the citizens, have to step up to make our voices heard through whatever media or platforms that we have access to. We have to express our expectations from the caretaker government, from the military, from the existing political parties, and also from the emerging parties.
We have to convey very strongly what we want, and what we don't want. Due to years of subjugation by corrupt and undemocratic rule, we, the citizens, seem to have lost faith in the fact that WE count.
The recent withdrawal of decisions regarding the exile of two leaders is a testament of the power of citizenry. We cannot just be silent observers as the "titans" battle for control of the country. We also cannot afford to be critics, just sitting on the fence blaming the leaders.
We have to get our hands dirty, open ourselves to possible criticism, and get actively involved in shaping the country's fate. Otherwise, our inactions may be taken advantage of by the current power brokers to guide the country into yet another phase of dictatorial control with "manufactured legitimacy."
Dr Yunus has certainly taken an important first step towards creating a political platform for voicing opinions about the kind of new Bangladesh that we envision. Although he has so far hardly used that platform, it is still up to us to take courage and inspiration from this to get more politically involved, whether through Nagorik Shakti, other independent parties or existing party platforms.
I eagerly look forward to seeing many more intelligent, well-intentioned and honest (young) people rise to the occasion, either through direct political mobilization or through finding expressions through various communication platforms. True democracy can only begin to emerge when there are adequate opposing political views and platforms to ensure a healthy environment of check and balance -- and I sincerely hope that the cleaning up efforts of the caretaker government and the military are geared towards that rather than installing yet another "set of rulers" in an undemocratic way.
No matter where we are, or what we are doing -- it is high time that we speak out, act, and try to establish that it is really the citizens of this country who should matter at the end of the day. And that we will not be just silent observers of yet another power-play among the elite "rulers" and "ex-rulers" that only tries to gain legitimacy through muscle power and fear of repression.
Published in the Daily Star on Friday, April 27th, 2007:
http://www.thedailystar.net/2007/04/27/d704271503125.htm
I still remember the moment when I read in an email that Dr Yunus had announced his willingness to form a political party -- I was studying with a group of classmates who were left bewildered as I left the meeting abruptly -- too ecstatic to work on assignments in a confined room. I needed fresh air, and a moment of solitary reflection to internalize the new realities opening up in Bangladesh.
The source of my jubilation was the strong belief that Dr Yunus' entry into politics through forming Nagorik Shakti (NS) would undoubtedly usher in a new era of politics in Bangladesh; where the voices of those generally trampled upon would finally find an outlet, where new platforms would be created for progressive, honest and citizen-centric politics led by the youth and, most importantly, where the existing and emerging parties would strive to live upto the standards defined by NS.
Much to my continuing disappointment, Nagorik Shakti has yet to make a formal public emergence with clearly defined political ideologies. But the need for such a platform has increased many-fold, because of the recent attempts by the caretaker government to send to exile the leaders of the major parties of the country on the basis of flimsy justifications, and the swift reversal of their decision after pressure from the media and the civil society.
Many who initially embraced the new caretaker government's resolve to fight corruption, and welcomed the military's strong support in strengthening key democratic institutions, are now having second thoughts. What initially seemed like an effort to give power back to the citizens is now apprehended by many to be an effort to shift power from one group to another, leaving the citizens just as powerless and voiceless.
But what can we, the citizens, do under the circumstances? Should we wait to see which direction this caretaker government and the military take the country towards? Should we wait for our political leaders to take a stance? Should we wait for new parties like Nagorik Shakti to bring in fresh perspectives to politics? Perhaps not -- all of this calls for too much waiting.
We, the citizens, have to step up to make our voices heard through whatever media or platforms that we have access to. We have to express our expectations from the caretaker government, from the military, from the existing political parties, and also from the emerging parties.
We have to convey very strongly what we want, and what we don't want. Due to years of subjugation by corrupt and undemocratic rule, we, the citizens, seem to have lost faith in the fact that WE count.
The recent withdrawal of decisions regarding the exile of two leaders is a testament of the power of citizenry. We cannot just be silent observers as the "titans" battle for control of the country. We also cannot afford to be critics, just sitting on the fence blaming the leaders.
We have to get our hands dirty, open ourselves to possible criticism, and get actively involved in shaping the country's fate. Otherwise, our inactions may be taken advantage of by the current power brokers to guide the country into yet another phase of dictatorial control with "manufactured legitimacy."
Dr Yunus has certainly taken an important first step towards creating a political platform for voicing opinions about the kind of new Bangladesh that we envision. Although he has so far hardly used that platform, it is still up to us to take courage and inspiration from this to get more politically involved, whether through Nagorik Shakti, other independent parties or existing party platforms.
I eagerly look forward to seeing many more intelligent, well-intentioned and honest (young) people rise to the occasion, either through direct political mobilization or through finding expressions through various communication platforms. True democracy can only begin to emerge when there are adequate opposing political views and platforms to ensure a healthy environment of check and balance -- and I sincerely hope that the cleaning up efforts of the caretaker government and the military are geared towards that rather than installing yet another "set of rulers" in an undemocratic way.
No matter where we are, or what we are doing -- it is high time that we speak out, act, and try to establish that it is really the citizens of this country who should matter at the end of the day. And that we will not be just silent observers of yet another power-play among the elite "rulers" and "ex-rulers" that only tries to gain legitimacy through muscle power and fear of repression.
Saturday, April 21, 2007
Where Are You Taking Our Country?
by Mridul Chowdhury
Published in the Daily Star on April 22nd, 2007
http://www.thedailystar.net/2007/04/22/d704221502118.htm
I have so many questions to those in control of the country that I do not know where to begin. The initial euphoria that began when this the caretaker government (CTG) led by Dr. Fakhruddin Ahmed took over reached a climax when Tarique Rahman was arrested, but has ever since gradually transformed into a feeling of restless discomfort and uncertainty. The recent steps of the CTG to put into exile the leaders of the two major parties revive the nagging doubt about the real motivation of the government and also brings into question how much independence this CTG really has in terms of decision-making.
One cannot but wonder about the curious timing of the charges against Sheikh Hasina and Tarique Rahman's brother combined with direct and indirect threats to ensure the exile of Sheikh Hasina and Khaleda Zia (along with their families) and ask why these are necessary. The government with support from the military has clearly been in total control of the country's political space. Many of the leaders from both parties are in jail. The ban on indoor politics is maintained without much resistance. Under these circumstances, is it justified to send these leaders to exile on the grounds that they may cause undue political and social unrest? If they do, the government clearly has enough strength and control to counter it -- what is the point of sending these leaders to exile?
There is a difference between rooting out corrupt elements from the political parties and rooting out political parties altogether and right now the CTG is walking along the thin line that distinguishes the two. If the motivation of this CTG is to re-establish democracy, shouldn't they be concentrating more on strengthening the democratic institutions, the judiciary and the anti-corruption commission instead of going to great lengths to forcibly send leaders to exile.
I am not saying that the country will lose much without leaders like Sheikh Hasina or Khaleda Zia since it may well be argued that they have possibly collectively done more harm to the country than good over the years. But it should be left to the people's mandate to decide whether to accept or reject them and to the legal system to decide their fate -- not unanimous and uncontested decision by the government to keep them out of the country.
Also, why are the trials of the thousands in jail taking so long? This unexplained delay in their trials is beginning to bring into question whether the CTG really wants to put them through a fair trial or just keep them out of politics for the time being and then free them when the time is right and their allegiance is aligned with the powers that behold.
Another nagging question is why are the leaders of the Jamaat-e-Islami and Jatiya Party relatively untouched? Have the leaders of those parties not done anything to deserve exile or jail? This selective punishment by the CTG also arises curiosities that have no clear responses.
The feeling of uncertainty is compounded by the army chief's proclamation of the need for a "new kind of democracy" and then falling short of clarifying what he exactly means. The citizens of this country are indebted to the army for stepping up in a crucial moment and leading the drive against corruption. But when the army steps out of its boundaries and starts defining the political system of a country, there is adequate reason to worry.
I sincerely hope that these worries and curiosities will prove to be unjustified in the long run and that the CTG in collaboration with the army will make way for democracy to flourish so that the existing parties can re-define their priorities and leadership, the emerging parties such as Nagorik Shakti can make a headway as an alternative political platform, and the new generation can participate in clean and honest politics of reform rather than destruction.
For now, my one source of comfort and hope is that I am able to write my thoughts in a newspaper. A corner of my mind still dreads the day that this government will "put the press to exile" too by saying that the press is contributing to political unrest. If the CTG ends up doing that, no amount of justification will be able to convince me that the CTG is not just "new wine in old bottle."
Published in the Daily Star on April 22nd, 2007
http://www.thedailystar.net/2007/04/22/d704221502118.htm
I have so many questions to those in control of the country that I do not know where to begin. The initial euphoria that began when this the caretaker government (CTG) led by Dr. Fakhruddin Ahmed took over reached a climax when Tarique Rahman was arrested, but has ever since gradually transformed into a feeling of restless discomfort and uncertainty. The recent steps of the CTG to put into exile the leaders of the two major parties revive the nagging doubt about the real motivation of the government and also brings into question how much independence this CTG really has in terms of decision-making.
One cannot but wonder about the curious timing of the charges against Sheikh Hasina and Tarique Rahman's brother combined with direct and indirect threats to ensure the exile of Sheikh Hasina and Khaleda Zia (along with their families) and ask why these are necessary. The government with support from the military has clearly been in total control of the country's political space. Many of the leaders from both parties are in jail. The ban on indoor politics is maintained without much resistance. Under these circumstances, is it justified to send these leaders to exile on the grounds that they may cause undue political and social unrest? If they do, the government clearly has enough strength and control to counter it -- what is the point of sending these leaders to exile?
There is a difference between rooting out corrupt elements from the political parties and rooting out political parties altogether and right now the CTG is walking along the thin line that distinguishes the two. If the motivation of this CTG is to re-establish democracy, shouldn't they be concentrating more on strengthening the democratic institutions, the judiciary and the anti-corruption commission instead of going to great lengths to forcibly send leaders to exile.
I am not saying that the country will lose much without leaders like Sheikh Hasina or Khaleda Zia since it may well be argued that they have possibly collectively done more harm to the country than good over the years. But it should be left to the people's mandate to decide whether to accept or reject them and to the legal system to decide their fate -- not unanimous and uncontested decision by the government to keep them out of the country.
Also, why are the trials of the thousands in jail taking so long? This unexplained delay in their trials is beginning to bring into question whether the CTG really wants to put them through a fair trial or just keep them out of politics for the time being and then free them when the time is right and their allegiance is aligned with the powers that behold.
Another nagging question is why are the leaders of the Jamaat-e-Islami and Jatiya Party relatively untouched? Have the leaders of those parties not done anything to deserve exile or jail? This selective punishment by the CTG also arises curiosities that have no clear responses.
The feeling of uncertainty is compounded by the army chief's proclamation of the need for a "new kind of democracy" and then falling short of clarifying what he exactly means. The citizens of this country are indebted to the army for stepping up in a crucial moment and leading the drive against corruption. But when the army steps out of its boundaries and starts defining the political system of a country, there is adequate reason to worry.
I sincerely hope that these worries and curiosities will prove to be unjustified in the long run and that the CTG in collaboration with the army will make way for democracy to flourish so that the existing parties can re-define their priorities and leadership, the emerging parties such as Nagorik Shakti can make a headway as an alternative political platform, and the new generation can participate in clean and honest politics of reform rather than destruction.
For now, my one source of comfort and hope is that I am able to write my thoughts in a newspaper. A corner of my mind still dreads the day that this government will "put the press to exile" too by saying that the press is contributing to political unrest. If the CTG ends up doing that, no amount of justification will be able to convince me that the CTG is not just "new wine in old bottle."
Friday, April 20, 2007
Politics-Free Campus: Good or Bad?
by Mridul Chowdhury
Published in Daily Star on April 6th, 2007
http://www.thedailystar.net/2007/04/06/d704061501124.htm
Are you someone who has been a powerless "victim" of a highly politicized and, in many ways, decaying public tertiary educational system of our country? I suspect that many of you are -- a victim of a system where university administrators get appointed based on subservience to ruling party rather than on academic and administrative merit, where teachers get selected or promoted on the basis of party affiliations, where students have to sign up as a party member in order to get hostel seats, and where on-campus gun-fights between students wings of opposing political parties (typically over issues of campus dominance) is a phenomenon that university-goers have to grow accustomed to.
A typical foreigner coming into Bangladesh for the first time is shocked to find out that the country's main centre for learning and research -- Dhaka University -- is also a "red zone" for political violence.
It is encouraging to see that the UGC has recently taken a long-due responsible role in drafting a law to de-politicize university administration and develop strict guidelines regarding on-campus politics. This is something that only a powerful caretaker government can implement since the elected political parties will never have the incentive to do it.
However, we have to be careful about the extent to which these restrictions are set in place. We have to differentiate between "political mobilization for a cause" and "political mobilization for self-interest and power." The UGC's efforts have to ensure that the first kind of mobilization is not restricted.
It is true that the nature of on-campus politics has fundamentally changed over the years (except for a few exceptions such as left-inclined political activism) -- pre-liberation was a period of ideology-based politics, the 1980s was a period of movement against autocracy; however, since the early 1990s, the nature of student politics took a dramatically different turn.
Throughout the 1980s, during the process of student mobilization against the autocratic government, the seeds of powerful, destructive and armed student politics were taking shape behind the scene.
Ironically, since 1991, when so-called pseudo-democracy was established in Bangladesh, student politics largely ceased to be about causes or ideologies but more about shameless sycophancy towards the leaders of the mainstream political parties with a single-minded goal of power and wealth.
The parties have also gained significantly in letting this perpetuate since the rule of today's political game in Bangladesh has become terrorism against the political opponents -- and students wings have become the main lathial bahini (the militia wing) for that purpose.
Despite the fact that student politics has become polluted over the years, we still have to realize that university campuses are the havens for freedom of expression and political mobilization if needed. If you take away the right to engage in free thinking in universities, you root out the heart of what "democracy" is all about in a country.
In that light, UGC's recent attempt to "ban campus politics" needs to be supported with caution. If they ban the right to form student wings of mainstream political parties inside the campus, it is acceptable. But if they ban the right to congregate and discuss what is right and what is wrong with the country's politics and mobilize around certain political causes, then we have an issue to speak out against.
I hope that the UGC and the caretaker government focuses not on banning political mobilization in campuses altogether but on the real issues that pollute the academic environment, including increased accountability of UGC itself. Some recommendations for rules regarding on-campus politics include:
- Make illegal all causes of session jams, such as internal strikes by students or teachers and teachers' non-accountability regarding grading or exams.
- University administrators cannot be political appointees.
- Active party politics among university teachers must be eradicated.
- Activities of student wings of mainstream political parties may not be allowed on campus.
- Strict rules/ laws against appointment or promotion of teachers based on party affiliation.
- The control of hostel seats and other administrative matters by student political leaders has to be completely eradicated.
Bangladesh is an independent country today because of student activism; Bangladesh got rid of autocracy because of student activism. Just because we now temporarily have a seemingly "benevolent, just and honest" government does not mean that we will always enjoy such privilege. And when we don't, it will have to be the students who will come forward to change the way things are.
Students are the most important conscience of a society; they fill a role that no other institution or group can -- since all the rest are bound by some agenda or the other. If today, we make or support laws that can potentially be misused by any authority to squelch the voice of students, we may be setting ourselves up for yet another round of unstoppable 'force' from taking control of the country for a long time to come.
Published in Daily Star on April 6th, 2007
http://www.thedailystar.net/2007/04/06/d704061501124.htm
Are you someone who has been a powerless "victim" of a highly politicized and, in many ways, decaying public tertiary educational system of our country? I suspect that many of you are -- a victim of a system where university administrators get appointed based on subservience to ruling party rather than on academic and administrative merit, where teachers get selected or promoted on the basis of party affiliations, where students have to sign up as a party member in order to get hostel seats, and where on-campus gun-fights between students wings of opposing political parties (typically over issues of campus dominance) is a phenomenon that university-goers have to grow accustomed to.
A typical foreigner coming into Bangladesh for the first time is shocked to find out that the country's main centre for learning and research -- Dhaka University -- is also a "red zone" for political violence.
It is encouraging to see that the UGC has recently taken a long-due responsible role in drafting a law to de-politicize university administration and develop strict guidelines regarding on-campus politics. This is something that only a powerful caretaker government can implement since the elected political parties will never have the incentive to do it.
However, we have to be careful about the extent to which these restrictions are set in place. We have to differentiate between "political mobilization for a cause" and "political mobilization for self-interest and power." The UGC's efforts have to ensure that the first kind of mobilization is not restricted.
It is true that the nature of on-campus politics has fundamentally changed over the years (except for a few exceptions such as left-inclined political activism) -- pre-liberation was a period of ideology-based politics, the 1980s was a period of movement against autocracy; however, since the early 1990s, the nature of student politics took a dramatically different turn.
Throughout the 1980s, during the process of student mobilization against the autocratic government, the seeds of powerful, destructive and armed student politics were taking shape behind the scene.
Ironically, since 1991, when so-called pseudo-democracy was established in Bangladesh, student politics largely ceased to be about causes or ideologies but more about shameless sycophancy towards the leaders of the mainstream political parties with a single-minded goal of power and wealth.
The parties have also gained significantly in letting this perpetuate since the rule of today's political game in Bangladesh has become terrorism against the political opponents -- and students wings have become the main lathial bahini (the militia wing) for that purpose.
Despite the fact that student politics has become polluted over the years, we still have to realize that university campuses are the havens for freedom of expression and political mobilization if needed. If you take away the right to engage in free thinking in universities, you root out the heart of what "democracy" is all about in a country.
In that light, UGC's recent attempt to "ban campus politics" needs to be supported with caution. If they ban the right to form student wings of mainstream political parties inside the campus, it is acceptable. But if they ban the right to congregate and discuss what is right and what is wrong with the country's politics and mobilize around certain political causes, then we have an issue to speak out against.
I hope that the UGC and the caretaker government focuses not on banning political mobilization in campuses altogether but on the real issues that pollute the academic environment, including increased accountability of UGC itself. Some recommendations for rules regarding on-campus politics include:
- Make illegal all causes of session jams, such as internal strikes by students or teachers and teachers' non-accountability regarding grading or exams.
- University administrators cannot be political appointees.
- Active party politics among university teachers must be eradicated.
- Activities of student wings of mainstream political parties may not be allowed on campus.
- Strict rules/ laws against appointment or promotion of teachers based on party affiliation.
- The control of hostel seats and other administrative matters by student political leaders has to be completely eradicated.
Bangladesh is an independent country today because of student activism; Bangladesh got rid of autocracy because of student activism. Just because we now temporarily have a seemingly "benevolent, just and honest" government does not mean that we will always enjoy such privilege. And when we don't, it will have to be the students who will come forward to change the way things are.
Students are the most important conscience of a society; they fill a role that no other institution or group can -- since all the rest are bound by some agenda or the other. If today, we make or support laws that can potentially be misused by any authority to squelch the voice of students, we may be setting ourselves up for yet another round of unstoppable 'force' from taking control of the country for a long time to come.
Demise of BNP?
by Mridul Chowdhury
Published in Daily Star on March 11, 2007
http://www.thedailystar.net/2007/03/11/d703111502126.htm
The recent arrest of Tarique Rahman has generated a wave of jubilation across the country. Before his arrest, there were many who doubted whether this caretaker government (CG) really had the ability to strike at the so-called "root of all evil." Many feared that if Tarique is not touched, much of CG's efforts to uproot corruption from politics would be left incomplete and perhaps even reversed when the CG steps down. By arresting Tarique, the CG has laid all doubts to rest. It has proven that it is powerful and well-meaning enough to get to the top of the corruption pyramid -- which many thought was unreachable.
Now, what are its implications for BNP, a party which has already been rapidly losing ground due to internal conflicts and the increasing lack of popular support due to the arrest of most of its top leaders on corruption charges.
This will undoubtedly cause the following things to happen: 1) the BNP leaders who have so far been marginalized due to the authoritarian and often condescending dominance of Tarique will now try to gain ground within the party and voice their grievances against him more openly; 2) Khaleda Zia herself will be increasingly marginalized within the party due to her inevitable and continuing unbridled extension of support to her son; 3) the internal rift within BNP will rise rapidly as the anti-Tarique camp will try to capitalize on the situation; 4) some corrupt elements within BNP who have so far been sheltered by Tarique may even leave the party thus making the pro-Tarique camp even weaker. Overall, this arrest is bound to weaken BNP to an extent from which it may never really recover.
Another important point to take into account is that Tarique's arrest must have the result of a calculated move on the part of the CG and the forces behind it. Those forces perhaps would not risk putting Tarique behind bars unless they were more or less sure that he would not in the near future come back to become the executive head of the country and take his vengeance out on those who had disgraced him.
All of these facts point to the inevitable fact that it will be hard for BNP to ever rise again as a legitimate political strength -- it is an irony that the son of a father known for his personal honesty would stoop down to the level of a godfather of criminals and his arrest would send ripples of jubilance and relief among people of all quarters. His innumerable misdeeds are now sure to surface one by one as more and more people will make their suppressed voices heard.
The BNP, like the AL and the Jatiya Party, is an extremely personality-centric political platform that has drawn its legitimacy from the image of Ziaur Rahman. As more and more people get to know about Tarique's desecration of that last name and her mother's blind eye to the shameful exploitation of his position, it is sure to bring down the party's image and acceptance to an irrecoverable state. Although BNP will possibly continue to remain in the political sphere of the country, the question now is whether it will soon join the ranks of Jatiya Party as yet another fallen and disgraced "opposition party" or whether it will re-emerge as a significant political force perhaps with new leadership.
Published in Daily Star on March 11, 2007
http://www.thedailystar.net/2007/03/11/d703111502126.htm
The recent arrest of Tarique Rahman has generated a wave of jubilation across the country. Before his arrest, there were many who doubted whether this caretaker government (CG) really had the ability to strike at the so-called "root of all evil." Many feared that if Tarique is not touched, much of CG's efforts to uproot corruption from politics would be left incomplete and perhaps even reversed when the CG steps down. By arresting Tarique, the CG has laid all doubts to rest. It has proven that it is powerful and well-meaning enough to get to the top of the corruption pyramid -- which many thought was unreachable.
Now, what are its implications for BNP, a party which has already been rapidly losing ground due to internal conflicts and the increasing lack of popular support due to the arrest of most of its top leaders on corruption charges.
This will undoubtedly cause the following things to happen: 1) the BNP leaders who have so far been marginalized due to the authoritarian and often condescending dominance of Tarique will now try to gain ground within the party and voice their grievances against him more openly; 2) Khaleda Zia herself will be increasingly marginalized within the party due to her inevitable and continuing unbridled extension of support to her son; 3) the internal rift within BNP will rise rapidly as the anti-Tarique camp will try to capitalize on the situation; 4) some corrupt elements within BNP who have so far been sheltered by Tarique may even leave the party thus making the pro-Tarique camp even weaker. Overall, this arrest is bound to weaken BNP to an extent from which it may never really recover.
Another important point to take into account is that Tarique's arrest must have the result of a calculated move on the part of the CG and the forces behind it. Those forces perhaps would not risk putting Tarique behind bars unless they were more or less sure that he would not in the near future come back to become the executive head of the country and take his vengeance out on those who had disgraced him.
All of these facts point to the inevitable fact that it will be hard for BNP to ever rise again as a legitimate political strength -- it is an irony that the son of a father known for his personal honesty would stoop down to the level of a godfather of criminals and his arrest would send ripples of jubilance and relief among people of all quarters. His innumerable misdeeds are now sure to surface one by one as more and more people will make their suppressed voices heard.
The BNP, like the AL and the Jatiya Party, is an extremely personality-centric political platform that has drawn its legitimacy from the image of Ziaur Rahman. As more and more people get to know about Tarique's desecration of that last name and her mother's blind eye to the shameful exploitation of his position, it is sure to bring down the party's image and acceptance to an irrecoverable state. Although BNP will possibly continue to remain in the political sphere of the country, the question now is whether it will soon join the ranks of Jatiya Party as yet another fallen and disgraced "opposition party" or whether it will re-emerge as a significant political force perhaps with new leadership.
Shift Away from Cult-Based Politics
by Mridul Chowdhury
Published on the Daily Star Independence Day Special 2007
http://www.thedailystar.net/suppliments/2007/march/26thmarch/shift.htm
The 'War' Continues
I was born after the Liberation War - even after the Father of the Nation was murdered. So I have not personally witnessed the first few phases of the ups and downs in Bangladesh's politics. By the time I began to develop a sense of politics, a military dictator was running the country. Images of the martyred Nur Hossain with his bare chest and back painted with the words: sairachar nipat jak, ganatantra mukti pak (down with autocracy, restore democracy), and his right fist raised to the sky were possibly my first impression of the post-liberation “freedom fighter”. I may have missed the Liberation War but the 'War' for true freedom, it seemed, was hardly over.
While growing up in Bangladesh, I used to feel that we live in a 'strangely unpredictable' country where the biggest upholders of democracy and citizens' rights have suddenly turned into autocrats with their own private army, where thousands of freedom-fighters who fought to liberate the country have been thrown into jail or executed without trial a few years after liberation, where the active opponents of the liberation of Bangladesh have been installed as ministers in key ministries, and where during each election, a 'key' political leader always becomes the subject of tanatani (pulling to one's own side) by both major political parties. Guess who that 'leader' is, the autocrat that Nur Hossain and all the major political parties fought to bring down!
Although the Liberation War was fought to uphold democratic values, Bangladesh has possibly never really enjoyed democracy in the real sense our politics has generally always been controlled by a handful of people who are closely associated with our 'elite' families. Personality-centric politics rather than ideology-based politics has enabled political parties in power to misuse their authorities to the extent that the bureaucracy and the judiciary, the two public institutions that make up the very fabric of the governance of a country, have been gradually forced to lose their integrity and largely become subservient to the whims of those in power.
Renewed Hope in the PresentAlmost 20 years have passed since Nur Hossain was shot to death by the police. Over the years, we have witnessed many more Nur Hossains giving their blood to the cause of social justice. Their blood, however, has not gone in vain. The resistance they have put up with their own lives has made way for renewed signs of hope.
That hope is currently embodied in the new caretaker government (CG), silently backed by the military, which is putting thousands of corrupt political leaders to jail, including the most powerful ones who were once thought to be 'untouchable.' More than anything else, it is creating a nation-wide drive, a national stance in unilaterally condemning corruption which I am sure will have an impact during the upcoming election. It is also extremely heartening to see that the CG is taking initiatives to try to not only ensure a free and fair election but also to restructure and strengthen our key democratic institutions particularly the judiciary, the anti-corruption commission, the election commission and more gradually, the bureaucracy in general.
Another major source of hope right now is Dr. Yunus' formation of Nagorik Shakti. As a post-liberation new generation kid growing up in a country where school textbooks on Bangladeshi history get revised depending on which political party is in power, I was ecstatic to hear when Dr. Yunus announced his willingness to form a political party. I express my sincerest gratitude to Dr. Yunus for creating this scope for an alternative political future in Bangladesh.
My Hopes for the FutureOn this day, the 26th March of 2007 exactly 36 years after the declaration of an independent Bangladesh, I feel that Bangladesh is on the verge of being re-born. I feel that my country is ready to reclaim its 'lost' years and I am more excited than ever before at the prospect of being able to participate in this process. As I put my faith in the current CG and in Nagorik Shakti, I hope that the political dynamics that have been initiated in the last few weeks bring about a lasting positive impact in our politics through a series of changes, some of which I list below:
Power Back to the People
Despite the fact that I am jubilant about the efforts of the current CG and the armed forces, I realize that these impacts will be complete only when power is transferred back to the people through a democratic process. While the current process through a state of emergency is having many positive impacts, I hope that the CG transfers power back to the people. before any 'uncontrollable force' is able to exploit the situation, a phenomenon that our unfortunate country has faced time and again.
Shift Away From Personality-Centric Politics
Bangladesh has a tradition of personality-centric political parties that draw their legitimacy from certain personalities and their images - this has greatly contributed towards creating a culture of non-representational politics at all levels, where local voices have hardly found a way of reaching national political podiums, and internal party dynamics has been centered around a very few selected groups of elite closest to those personalities and their immediate family members. Corruption and terrorism in politics are not causes but symptoms of the weak political mechanism in our country -- just removing the symptoms is not likely to lead to a sustainable change towards constructive and representational politics.
I certainly hope that Dr. Yunus through his Nagorik Shakti will set an example in building a party that will live on for years as a formidable 'third force' and will not be centered around his own personality. We have witnessed Dr. Yunus running his Grameen organizations in somewhat of an authoritarian way and I sincerely hope that he will not transfer his Grameen way of running an organization to Nagorik Shakti.
I also hope that this current process of change brings about internal political dynamics within the major parties, such as the AL and the BNP, through a move away from dynasties handing over party authority from one generation to another. I hope that our politics moves towards a state where party leadership is based on ability and honesty rather than family linkage.
Political Discourse around Developmental Issues
Another sign of immaturity in our politics is that political discourse in Bangladesh has never really been centered around developmental issues but rather mostly around vague promises and hollow rhetoric. Again, Dr. Yunus can potentially change that culture. He has so far outlined some priorities of his new party in his two open letters using somewhat broad, vague and largely clichéd terms using largely similar rhetoric of some of the other parties. I hope that he will quickly move to the next stage of the party's vision-setting by addressing specific issues that people care about, not in vague but in very concrete terms. For that, he needs to develop and communicate concrete plans for his response to the different needs and expectations of citizens from different walks of life.
Politics by the Youth
Bangladeshi politics has come to a point where the young generation is largely disillusioned and even disgusted with politics. Apart from a few ideology-based and mostly left-wing young political activists, student and youth politics has over the years been denigrated to mostly terrorism and extortion the youth-based political groups have largely become the terrorist extensions of the major political parties. I hope that the CG gives attention to making university campuses free from destructive politics and introduces harsh laws against perpetrators and facilitators of campus-based terrorism and 'session-jams'. Just as the recent 'corruption clean-up operation' by the CG is facilitating the development of a national psyche against corruption, I hope that another national movement is generated to root out campus-based destructive politics so that positive, ideology-based and peaceful youth politics can be re-established.
Nagorik Shakti can also potentially imbibe that culture of youth involvement in positive politics. In this regard, it may be mentioned that despite Dr. Yunus' rhetoric around the importance of youth participation in development processes, Grameen Bank's micro- credit schemes hardly targeted the youth directly since they belonged to the category of 'risky borrowers'. So Dr. Yunus may not have a strong base to start from in this particular regard in rural areas. Some of the urban-based and expatriate youth groups are already in the process of mobilizing resources to contribute formally or informally towards building Nagorik Shakti. I hope that Nagorik Shakti is able to gain the confidence of rural youth in getting involved in positive and peaceful politics. At the end of the day, it is really up to us, the young generation, to build on the positive environment that is being created by the CG and hopefully, later by Nagorik Shakti.
Concluding Thoughts
My 'hope-list' may sound rather ambitious but I strongly believe that these are attainable if the current positive trends continue. I sense a massive optimism in the air from various quarters people are regaining trust in the ability of a well-meaning government and the youth are again in the process of finding an opportunity for contribution through positive political processes. Nur Hossains of the 21st century are on the rise again and this time they will not allow themselves to be shot down.
Published on the Daily Star Independence Day Special 2007
http://www.thedailystar.net/suppliments/2007/march/26thmarch/shift.htm
The 'War' Continues
I was born after the Liberation War - even after the Father of the Nation was murdered. So I have not personally witnessed the first few phases of the ups and downs in Bangladesh's politics. By the time I began to develop a sense of politics, a military dictator was running the country. Images of the martyred Nur Hossain with his bare chest and back painted with the words: sairachar nipat jak, ganatantra mukti pak (down with autocracy, restore democracy), and his right fist raised to the sky were possibly my first impression of the post-liberation “freedom fighter”. I may have missed the Liberation War but the 'War' for true freedom, it seemed, was hardly over.
While growing up in Bangladesh, I used to feel that we live in a 'strangely unpredictable' country where the biggest upholders of democracy and citizens' rights have suddenly turned into autocrats with their own private army, where thousands of freedom-fighters who fought to liberate the country have been thrown into jail or executed without trial a few years after liberation, where the active opponents of the liberation of Bangladesh have been installed as ministers in key ministries, and where during each election, a 'key' political leader always becomes the subject of tanatani (pulling to one's own side) by both major political parties. Guess who that 'leader' is, the autocrat that Nur Hossain and all the major political parties fought to bring down!
Although the Liberation War was fought to uphold democratic values, Bangladesh has possibly never really enjoyed democracy in the real sense our politics has generally always been controlled by a handful of people who are closely associated with our 'elite' families. Personality-centric politics rather than ideology-based politics has enabled political parties in power to misuse their authorities to the extent that the bureaucracy and the judiciary, the two public institutions that make up the very fabric of the governance of a country, have been gradually forced to lose their integrity and largely become subservient to the whims of those in power.
Renewed Hope in the PresentAlmost 20 years have passed since Nur Hossain was shot to death by the police. Over the years, we have witnessed many more Nur Hossains giving their blood to the cause of social justice. Their blood, however, has not gone in vain. The resistance they have put up with their own lives has made way for renewed signs of hope.
That hope is currently embodied in the new caretaker government (CG), silently backed by the military, which is putting thousands of corrupt political leaders to jail, including the most powerful ones who were once thought to be 'untouchable.' More than anything else, it is creating a nation-wide drive, a national stance in unilaterally condemning corruption which I am sure will have an impact during the upcoming election. It is also extremely heartening to see that the CG is taking initiatives to try to not only ensure a free and fair election but also to restructure and strengthen our key democratic institutions particularly the judiciary, the anti-corruption commission, the election commission and more gradually, the bureaucracy in general.
Another major source of hope right now is Dr. Yunus' formation of Nagorik Shakti. As a post-liberation new generation kid growing up in a country where school textbooks on Bangladeshi history get revised depending on which political party is in power, I was ecstatic to hear when Dr. Yunus announced his willingness to form a political party. I express my sincerest gratitude to Dr. Yunus for creating this scope for an alternative political future in Bangladesh.
My Hopes for the FutureOn this day, the 26th March of 2007 exactly 36 years after the declaration of an independent Bangladesh, I feel that Bangladesh is on the verge of being re-born. I feel that my country is ready to reclaim its 'lost' years and I am more excited than ever before at the prospect of being able to participate in this process. As I put my faith in the current CG and in Nagorik Shakti, I hope that the political dynamics that have been initiated in the last few weeks bring about a lasting positive impact in our politics through a series of changes, some of which I list below:
Power Back to the People
Despite the fact that I am jubilant about the efforts of the current CG and the armed forces, I realize that these impacts will be complete only when power is transferred back to the people through a democratic process. While the current process through a state of emergency is having many positive impacts, I hope that the CG transfers power back to the people. before any 'uncontrollable force' is able to exploit the situation, a phenomenon that our unfortunate country has faced time and again.
Shift Away From Personality-Centric Politics
Bangladesh has a tradition of personality-centric political parties that draw their legitimacy from certain personalities and their images - this has greatly contributed towards creating a culture of non-representational politics at all levels, where local voices have hardly found a way of reaching national political podiums, and internal party dynamics has been centered around a very few selected groups of elite closest to those personalities and their immediate family members. Corruption and terrorism in politics are not causes but symptoms of the weak political mechanism in our country -- just removing the symptoms is not likely to lead to a sustainable change towards constructive and representational politics.
I certainly hope that Dr. Yunus through his Nagorik Shakti will set an example in building a party that will live on for years as a formidable 'third force' and will not be centered around his own personality. We have witnessed Dr. Yunus running his Grameen organizations in somewhat of an authoritarian way and I sincerely hope that he will not transfer his Grameen way of running an organization to Nagorik Shakti.
I also hope that this current process of change brings about internal political dynamics within the major parties, such as the AL and the BNP, through a move away from dynasties handing over party authority from one generation to another. I hope that our politics moves towards a state where party leadership is based on ability and honesty rather than family linkage.
Political Discourse around Developmental Issues
Another sign of immaturity in our politics is that political discourse in Bangladesh has never really been centered around developmental issues but rather mostly around vague promises and hollow rhetoric. Again, Dr. Yunus can potentially change that culture. He has so far outlined some priorities of his new party in his two open letters using somewhat broad, vague and largely clichéd terms using largely similar rhetoric of some of the other parties. I hope that he will quickly move to the next stage of the party's vision-setting by addressing specific issues that people care about, not in vague but in very concrete terms. For that, he needs to develop and communicate concrete plans for his response to the different needs and expectations of citizens from different walks of life.
Politics by the Youth
Bangladeshi politics has come to a point where the young generation is largely disillusioned and even disgusted with politics. Apart from a few ideology-based and mostly left-wing young political activists, student and youth politics has over the years been denigrated to mostly terrorism and extortion the youth-based political groups have largely become the terrorist extensions of the major political parties. I hope that the CG gives attention to making university campuses free from destructive politics and introduces harsh laws against perpetrators and facilitators of campus-based terrorism and 'session-jams'. Just as the recent 'corruption clean-up operation' by the CG is facilitating the development of a national psyche against corruption, I hope that another national movement is generated to root out campus-based destructive politics so that positive, ideology-based and peaceful youth politics can be re-established.
Nagorik Shakti can also potentially imbibe that culture of youth involvement in positive politics. In this regard, it may be mentioned that despite Dr. Yunus' rhetoric around the importance of youth participation in development processes, Grameen Bank's micro- credit schemes hardly targeted the youth directly since they belonged to the category of 'risky borrowers'. So Dr. Yunus may not have a strong base to start from in this particular regard in rural areas. Some of the urban-based and expatriate youth groups are already in the process of mobilizing resources to contribute formally or informally towards building Nagorik Shakti. I hope that Nagorik Shakti is able to gain the confidence of rural youth in getting involved in positive and peaceful politics. At the end of the day, it is really up to us, the young generation, to build on the positive environment that is being created by the CG and hopefully, later by Nagorik Shakti.
Concluding Thoughts
My 'hope-list' may sound rather ambitious but I strongly believe that these are attainable if the current positive trends continue. I sense a massive optimism in the air from various quarters people are regaining trust in the ability of a well-meaning government and the youth are again in the process of finding an opportunity for contribution through positive political processes. Nur Hossains of the 21st century are on the rise again and this time they will not allow themselves to be shot down.
Why "Yunus Shamarthak Goshthi"?
By Mridul Chowdhury
Published in Daily Star on 21st February, 2007
http://www.thedailystar.net/2007/02/21/d70221020421.htm
Over the course of the last few decades we have grown so used to seeing Bangladeshi politics turn into a hotbed of corruption, terrorism and power play that we, particularly the young generation, have developed a strong distaste for politics and politicians in general. At such a time, by announcing his intent to form a political party, Dr Yunus, the unquestionable national hero and pride of our time has brought back hope and has perhaps changed the way we will look at the role of politics in Bangladesh.
Even if his party cannot win in the upcoming elections, he will have produced a political platform that has the potential to change the Bangladeshi political scenario once and for all. It is sure to offer a chance for those who want to contribute to positive change through involvement in constructive politics, but have never found a meaningful space in the existing political scene, which is mostly controlled by corruption, terrorism and cronyism. And, perhaps as a result of Dr Yunus's entry into politics, the culture of developmental politics will gradually take root in Bangladesh.
Having said that, I should also point out that perhaps one of the biggest sources of weaknesses in our political process is our inherent attitude of hero-worshipping when it comes to politics. All the political parties, which have governed the country since its formation, find their legitimacy and strength around certain personalities. This has greatly contributed towards creating a culture of non-representational politics at all levels, where local voices have hardly found a way of reaching national political podiums, and internal party dynamics has been cantered around a very few selected groups of elite closest to those personalities and their immediate family members.
We certainly hope that Dr Yunus, with all his wisdom and intellect, will not follow the same trend and build a party that draws its legitimacy from his own personality -- no matter how well intentioned and honest he himself may be. The overarching goal of a political party should be to create a platform for fair and objective representation of people from all corners of a country so that it goes beyond national personalities and stands the test of time and change of leadership.
Dr Yunus's recent move to form "Yunus samarthak goshthi," or "Yunus supporters' groups," at village and ward-level to gain support for his as yet non-existent party certainly points to the fact that he may be in the process of building another personality-centric party. He is still officially in the process of gathering people's feedback on whether he should form a party or not; he has also not yet laid down any ideological basis on which his party will be formed, except that it will be free of corruption -- which is not really a political ideology by itself. And, yet, he is already mobilizing grass-root level support around himself, not around the concept of a new political party or any ideology.
If Dr Yunus does end up creating yet another heavily centralized, personality-based political party, he will have contributed little to changing the very core of what is wrong with our politics.
Corruption and terrorism in politics are not causes but symptoms of the weak political mechanism in our country -- just removing the symptoms is not likely to lead to a sustainable change towards constructive and representational politics. If we cannot make use of this historic opportunity, presented by the recent caretaker government, to build a sustainable political process of representation, the country, sooner or later, is sure to again slip into the grips of questionable national heroes (whether self-proclaimed or not), no matter what positive developments we see in the short-run.
Published in Daily Star on 21st February, 2007
http://www.thedailystar.net/2007/02/21/d70221020421.htm
Over the course of the last few decades we have grown so used to seeing Bangladeshi politics turn into a hotbed of corruption, terrorism and power play that we, particularly the young generation, have developed a strong distaste for politics and politicians in general. At such a time, by announcing his intent to form a political party, Dr Yunus, the unquestionable national hero and pride of our time has brought back hope and has perhaps changed the way we will look at the role of politics in Bangladesh.
Even if his party cannot win in the upcoming elections, he will have produced a political platform that has the potential to change the Bangladeshi political scenario once and for all. It is sure to offer a chance for those who want to contribute to positive change through involvement in constructive politics, but have never found a meaningful space in the existing political scene, which is mostly controlled by corruption, terrorism and cronyism. And, perhaps as a result of Dr Yunus's entry into politics, the culture of developmental politics will gradually take root in Bangladesh.
Having said that, I should also point out that perhaps one of the biggest sources of weaknesses in our political process is our inherent attitude of hero-worshipping when it comes to politics. All the political parties, which have governed the country since its formation, find their legitimacy and strength around certain personalities. This has greatly contributed towards creating a culture of non-representational politics at all levels, where local voices have hardly found a way of reaching national political podiums, and internal party dynamics has been cantered around a very few selected groups of elite closest to those personalities and their immediate family members.
We certainly hope that Dr Yunus, with all his wisdom and intellect, will not follow the same trend and build a party that draws its legitimacy from his own personality -- no matter how well intentioned and honest he himself may be. The overarching goal of a political party should be to create a platform for fair and objective representation of people from all corners of a country so that it goes beyond national personalities and stands the test of time and change of leadership.
Dr Yunus's recent move to form "Yunus samarthak goshthi," or "Yunus supporters' groups," at village and ward-level to gain support for his as yet non-existent party certainly points to the fact that he may be in the process of building another personality-centric party. He is still officially in the process of gathering people's feedback on whether he should form a party or not; he has also not yet laid down any ideological basis on which his party will be formed, except that it will be free of corruption -- which is not really a political ideology by itself. And, yet, he is already mobilizing grass-root level support around himself, not around the concept of a new political party or any ideology.
If Dr Yunus does end up creating yet another heavily centralized, personality-based political party, he will have contributed little to changing the very core of what is wrong with our politics.
Corruption and terrorism in politics are not causes but symptoms of the weak political mechanism in our country -- just removing the symptoms is not likely to lead to a sustainable change towards constructive and representational politics. If we cannot make use of this historic opportunity, presented by the recent caretaker government, to build a sustainable political process of representation, the country, sooner or later, is sure to again slip into the grips of questionable national heroes (whether self-proclaimed or not), no matter what positive developments we see in the short-run.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)