Opinion
BNP-Jamaat, made for each other
Recently Bangladesh Jamaat-e-Islami has resurfaced in the political arena. Last Friday, Jamaat men took to the streets, swooped on police and vandalized vehicles, demanding the restoration of the caretaker government system, echoing the demand of Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP). A number of media reports quoting the Jamaat top brass also suggest that now both parties have embarked on a mission to overthrow the government. This alliance holds a grisly record of unleashing street violence and targeted attacks on minorities, as well as law enforcers.
It seems that BNP was trying to distance itself from Jamaat over the last few years as they were trying to gain support from India and the western powers. However, they have not moved away from the anti-Liberation War and pro-terrorism politics of Jamaat – a party that not only opposed the birth of Bangladesh but was also involved in crimes against humanity during the Liberation War in 1971. Some BNP leaders were also convicted of crimes against humanity in 1971. Motiur Rahman Nizami and Ali Ahsan Mohammad Mujahid along with some other Jamaat leaders and Salahuddin Quader Chowdhury, a top BNP leader, who committed crimes against humanity during the Liberation War were brought to book by the International Crimes Tribunal.
BNP claims that their alliance with Jamaat is an “electoral alliance, not an ideological one.” But sustaining ties for such a long period is quite impossible without having close ideological alliance. Awami League and its allies have an electoral alliance based on the values emanating from the struggle for independence during Pakistani rule, i.e. democracy, socialism, secularism, and nationalism.
BNP could have been a party upholding liberal democracy. However, its reliance on Jamaat impedes the progressive political development in Bangladesh. On top of that, the so-called Bangladeshi nationalism, though superficially includes all ethnic minorities, disrespects the rights of the minorities by amending the constitution. Ziaur Rahman replaced secularism, as one of the founding principles of Bangladesh, that inspired our freedom fighters. His political move had nothing to do with Islam per se, but rather with the identity politics based on Islam.
Factually, Muslim freedom fighters believed in Allah and it gave them strength in fighting the unjust war imposed on a peace-loving people. But not all freedom fighters were Muslims. Most people believe that people of other faiths shall have their rights and recognition. This is called secularism. Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman stated in the Constituent Assembly in 1972 that secularism does not mean the absence of Islam or any other religion, but rights and recognition of all religions.
The BNP-Jamaat led government directly and indirectly patronized radical Islam. During the BNP-Jamaat led government’s tenure, Bangladesh drew global attention as a “transit route for terrorists”. Mufti Hannan and other Mujahideen who were trained by the CIA to combat Soviet forces in the 1980s became active in Bangladesh during the BNP-Jamaat regime which came to power in October 2001, a month after the 9/11 attack.
A series of terrorist attacks that include successful and unsuccessful assassination attempts on prominent political leaders, writers, artists, and secular intellectuals together with a spate of bomb explosions all across Bangladesh on a single day in 2005, brought Bangladesh to the Western bad book. A generally tolerant and peace-loving population grew intolerant to some extent and a small part of them also got involved in militant activities. The book entitled “Political Islam and Governance in Bangladesh”, edited by Ali Riaz and C. Christine Fair, refers to this as “a permissive government that indirectly and directly benefited from these developments.” And the “permissive government” was the government of the BNP-Jamaat alliance, a match made not in heaven.
The writer is former chairman, National Human Rights Commission of Bangladesh. Views expressed in this article are his own.
Political space: social media replacing streets ?
Two reasonably parallel but occasionally interloping spaces exist in our political world. One is with politicians who basically give speeches and the other is with social media personalities. It’s not easy to say who is more powerful but that there is competition is certain. And professional politicians aren’t necessarily winning. Time for transition and merging is on.
Professional and social media
One doesn’t have to pay exclusive attention to professional media because they also derive their significant influence from social media presence. Many media personalities are visible on TV which again is distributed by social media. TV today is increasingly social media based.
Online media is also split along two or even more groups. There are some online portals which are officially news media outlets. They don’t have any paper existence. They try to be “mainstream professional” but clout is determined by social media views.
Then there are FB/YT/ etc based TV channels which exist in a half formal half informal world, partly professional partly opportunistic. They also produce personalities including political ones.
And then there is the exclusive FB and YouTube based media outlets, chat shows and independent voices and FB lives. Together they are part of a world that in terms of influence is higher than others.
So where is professional politics now?
The politicians have become limited to TV Talk shows where professional politicians have to share space with commentators, many of whom wear just as well known faces as theirs. This makes the political opinion making process a mixed one, not exclusive to politicians. Just as the form is not exclusive, the content is also varied. They may form some very broad outlines but political significance is now determined by all kinds of faces from different worlds.
Read: TikTok now 2nd biggest social media platform in South Africa: Study
Once everything was a “birat jonosobha “where the politician communicated with the people directly but that phase is over. It was in a time where “Call ready” brand mikes mattered most in politics. The image of the politician be it Sk. Mujib or Maualana Bhashani without the mike addressing massive rallies at Paltan Maidan would be impossible to imagine.
These occasions were also big because communication opportunities were fewer. But it’s precisely the opposite that exists now. There are endless opportunities and spaces and everyone chats with everyone all day. Digitalization has expanded the political space in every way and it has transformed the political space as well as the politicians.
In today’s political world of Bangladesh, mass rallies are held but they have symbolic value. There is no call to battle type of slogan, no declaration that shapes the future. The decline of physical politics is obvious. In fact such calls are made every day on social media making resistance and movements a digitally dominated discussion.
The shape of current politics
What survives in the name of street politics is confrontation and violence rather than political encounters such as debates and elections. While the AL and the BNP both try to outdo each other in comparing their rally sizes, the fact remains that it’s not where the impact is made the most. Today social media reaches out to all shaping and strengthening not just the activists but the ideas of many lesser beings, who scrolling through social media are getting digitally involved in politics regularly. It's “Politics from Home” days now.
Read: Why social media is being blamed for fueling the riots in France
People professionally tracking social media say that, while many go to social media, not all believe in it. This is true but millions do and the doubters and thinkers who were influential are minorities now while the proverbial herd of public opinion is in social media’s control.
Hero Alam and Arafat
If one were looking for any example on the link between social media and politics, none is better than the two leading contenders for the recent Dhaka election.. Both Arafat and Hero Alam are products of social media largely. Their spaces differ as Arafat is the pro-AL professional intellectual, defending the cause of the ruling party. He does so articulately so the AL crowd follows him and concurrently, the BNP + crowd hates him. But he has no track record in a past political life and nor connected to any AL family member but is very seriously taken as their mouthpiece. On the digitals screen he was birthed by social media largely.
Hero Alam is an even bigger presence whose risé –again courtesy of social media – was also bereft of a political past which began only when he entered politics using his entertainment related activities. His political ideas and plans hardly matter as he is basically a very recognizable face who has become a counter- elite of sorts and not just a political one. However, in the end, both have a brand and that can be traced to social media.
They are not the only faces that we know but will know in future politics. Political stars are no longer being produced by the part system alone. Social media has begun to redo the face of politics itself and decide who will live there.
Read more: Seattle schools sue tech giants over social media harm
Politics of Lies
Democracy survives and thrives on various opinions provided by and debates by political parties, civil society organizations, and individuals. However, if the opinions contain misinformation and disinformation with the intention to malign the opponent, it cannot help democracy flourish. Unfortunately, this is exactly what’s happening in Bangladesh.
BNP prepared a list of 500 police personnel and sent that to foreign diplomats. These policemen of different ranks, BNP leaders alleged, were involved in human rights abuses and voting irregularities in Bangladesh’s national election held in late 2018.
Khandaker Mosharraf Hossain, one of the standing committee members of BNP, told media that the information would be presented to the international community.
BNP claimed that most of these 500 policemen were working in the field level during the 2018 national election and got promoted for their actions at that time. Promotion is a regular phenomenon in governmental and non-governmental offices. Many policemen apart from those who have been targeted by the BNP also got promoted for their performance. How can we differentiate? Probably, the BNP would have been happy if the policemen lent their support to the party. Police did not have any constitutional obligation to declare the BNP winner in the 2018 national election. BNP already had internal problems with the nomination business and external problems of distance from the people due to failure to represent public interests.
Before the state visit of Jean-Pierre Lacroix, United Nations Under Secretary-General for Peace Operations, to Bangladesh, some human rights organizations such as Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International raised the demand for not including Bangladeshi security force members in peacekeeping missions and stricter screening process.
BNP shared a post of the Human Rights Watch from their official Twitter handle and wrote: “Killers should not be peacekeepers.” The fact is that every member of the armed forces is not selected for UN peacekeeping. They must fulfill some criteria. Respecting human rights is, of course, one of them. In most cases, this rule is followed. So indiscriminate allegations against our patriotic and world-renowned peace-loving members of the armed forces as “violators of human rights” will demoralize the armed forces.
On January 5, 2014, the 10th national election took place. BNP, the main opposition party, did not participate in the election. Rather they decided to resist the elections violently. They launched a terrorizing protest movement. They jeopardized people’s lives and properties. Ironically, on February 4, 2014, Khaleda Zia claimed that law enforcement agencies and activists of Awami League killed 242 BNP-led alliance members in 34 districts of Bangladesh. On February 10, 2014, The Daily Star, a prominent national daily, published a report after cross-checking data from different sources and came to the conclusion that it was a “jugglery of figures”. The report said, “Khaleda put the death figure in Sirajganj at 14 that includes seven members of the BNP, Chhatra Dal and Jubo Dal.” But Harunar Rashid Hasan, office secretary of Sirajganj district BNP, informed The Daily Star that “only one Jubo Dal leader was killed during that time.” The Daily Star gave an interesting title to the report, “Sorry, Khaleda” because the figure provided by Khaleda Zia did not match facts on the ground. It was far-fetched from the truth.
Lies have many facets. In Bangladesh, it mainly revolves around the number of victims of human rights abuses. In this way, unfortunately, the discourse of human rights has been politicized. The numbers of disappearance given by different human rights groups are far from the number provided by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. Definitely, the UN report is not beyond questions. Sultana Kamal, a leading Bangladeshi human rights activist, said that the UN and international human rights organizations should not bank on a single source in their collection of data relating to human rights abuses. She argued that political parties would have allegations against each other but human rights organizations should ensure the veracity of their data. She also said that the government should not evade its duty to uncover the truth. It also has a duty not to blame either non-state actors as the sole perpetrator of the human rights abuses or the victims themselves.
Another facet of lies is to manipulate human emotions for narrow party interests. Let’s consider Mayer Daak for this purpose. It was formed in 2013 to work for the disappeared persons and their families. Without a doubt, it was a noble cause. They initially did some good work. However, this organization has been transformed into a forum for the aid of foreign powers by supplying them with fake stories of human rights abuses to help in their mission. This has doubly jeopardized the real victims of human rights violations.
Bangladesh became independent through a bloodbath during the war of liberation. The United States and some other powers were against the birth of Bangladesh at the time. Nevertheless, we want a good relationship based on mutual respect and sovereignty. BNP ran the government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh in the past. It should have thought twice before lowering the dignity of our motherland before the foreign powers. We fought against British colonialism and Pakistani internal colonialism. Both of them came from the West. Now we are fighting Western imperialism in its new form — disguising itself as a savior of human rights.
We all need to work together to improve the situation of human rights and democracy in Bangladesh. Unfortunately, democracy cannot flourish if major political parties like BNP act like a party of pathological liars. From their fake history of Ziaur Rahman as the proclaimer of our independence to present-day misinformation on human rights violations, BNP has a pandora’s box of lies and half-truths. Lastly, democracy depends on mass movement — based on people’s support for a cause. BNP has failed to show the people that they have a people’s cause.
The writer is former chairman, National Human Rights Commission of Bangladesh. Views expressed in this article are his own.
Iliyas Bhai, who are you ? Bengali nationalism’s contradictions
So dear Iliyas bhai, now that you are dead, I wonder if you can get a sense of history that dictated your life more than any other force. I didn’t want to write a longish farewell note as your departure was a personal matter for me. But reading several other notes, I thought I would discuss a few points –shall I call them contradictions- of your life, history and ours as well.
The roots
After your passing away, not many were sure about what to say about your death. After all, you were an Urdu speaker. You were here in 1971. Should they mourn the man who had led a heroic life which they didn’t know about or abuse him as a pro-Pakistani Urdu speaking agent of Yahya Khan without knowing much. ? It took a few days to recover some facts about you and now it’s safer to mourn your passing away as a poet. The poet’s identity is safe though not the rest.
But let’s face the fact. You were not a Bengali and if not who are you to our shushil consciousness dominated by linguistic culture ? In our simple peasant arithmetic, you speak Bengali therefore you exist and are part of us. It doesn’t matter that half of the Bengalis of Bengal refused to form an independent state –a united Bengal- in 1947 and decided to join India.
That Bengalis have never been one people, always split along lines of resistance and collaboration with colonialism is not something we like to dwell upon. We like to cling to historical fiction which helps our enjoyment of cultural products produced by those who sought the partition of Bengal in 1947.
Iliyas, the Urdu speaking “Bengali” nationalist?
Once Facebook felt more confident that Iliyas bhai was not a “traitor of Bengali nationalism” , his various political affiliations were mentioned including his support for the 6 points movement. Not much exactly about his closeness to Maulana Bhashani btw.
What few mentioned or know even is his long history of organizing Urdu speakers of East Pakistan who were mostly émigrés from India. Bangladeshis call them “Biharis” , the misnamed victims of colonial political history and two states being forced to become one Pakistan. No matter where he went, Iliyas bhai was designated as a “good Bihari”.He just could never become a good “Bangladeshi because for that you need to be a Bengali. It doesn’t matter that half of the so-called Bengali population are citizens of another state.
Born in 1934 in Kolkata, he finally settled in Dhaka in 1953. Poverty prevented higher education and like so many bright young men without money or connections he joined the media world. He was first a manager of the Press Club and later a journalist in various publications. He also became active in media trade unionism.
Iliyas bhai was part of the pro-East Pakistan Urdu journalists’ protesting Ayub Khan’s politics including sanctions against Tagore. In Bengali nationalism’s world, it was a contradiction that can’t be resolved. So let’s ignore this contradiction and anachronism.
In 1969, he along with others, organized the Muhajir convention which was the platform of pro-East Pakistan even AL-NAP politics supporting Urdu speakers. But it was a sincere but fragile effort as “Bengali nationalism “ had taken proto religious forms, very defined by exclusion and inclusion parameters based on ethno-linguistic frames.
A splendid portrait of the third cow child
The nationality test after 1971
Urdu media after 1971 was impossible and Iliyas bhai suffered the indignity of being labeled a “traitor” by reasons of his ancestral language. He had wholeheartedly sided with Bangladesh but it didn’t matter. His past in East Pakistan didn’t matter. He was only a Urdu speaker, hence a “Bihari”, hence a traitor.
There was no space for him in Bengali Bangladesh. Nobody says how he survived till 1975, bearing the stigma of collective demonization of a community. Finally, in 1975, he got a job in an NGO and entered a new world , where his dignity would be more intact. He had never wanted to go to Pakistan.
In 1980, he set up Al-Falah, dedicated to the betterment of the life of Geneva camp dwellers, read Biharis if you will. His book "Biharis: The Indian Emigres in Bangladesh ' drew attention to the plight of the camp dwellers of Bangladesh as well. He wrote several more books, all focused on the life of the Urdu speakers of Bangladesh, a strange contradiction of history in which he had no place.
Why a cry for democracy shouldn’t be a cry for destabilisation in Bangladesh
Many did want to go to Pakistan, the “stranded Pakistanis” as they were called but more and more didn’t. As the next generations grew up, this collective desire lessened naturally till it became just any convenient destination.
And Iliyas bhai remained firm in a world which never accepted him. Not when he came, not when he lived and nor when he died.
South Asia goes for strategic polyamory
“ I was born and grown up as Indian
I became matured as Pakistani
I remained stateless for 37 years
I will die as a Bangladeshi.”
US -China conflict: A civilizational or a cold war ?
The Wagner rebellion has proven that Putin’s world is shaky and decidedly incompetent. Western commentators are also saying that it has hit China too. Since, both are allies, therefore, a weak Russia means the Sino-Russo alliance is weakened and thus so is China.
Some have also speculated that the alliance itself is weakening as China is now taking advantage of the Russian problems and making money through trade and other deals. Reports are cited that China had requested Russia to postpone the invasion till after the Olympics to settle several other issues before it. However Russia went ahead but China has coped and also took advantage of the situation to make money and strengthen its currency. It’s also waiting to take over the leadership of the anti-West cluster as Russia and Putin are shrinking in clout and victories every day and China will lead by default.
Read: Just a day after Blinken’s Beijing visit to stabilize US-China relations, Biden calls Xi Jinping a ‘dictator’
No matter what the veracity of the observations, the fingers point to a West that is very concerned about the inevitable /potential rise of China and the inevitable slide of Russia –already visible- due to the Ukraine war .
Is “race”/”civilization” pushing US policy?
It’s curious how the responses and interpretation of the new cold war –“Sino –US” differs from the older version. The Chinese are part of the “inscrutable East '' while Russia, despite being a bad boy, is part of the West. As scholar Samuel Huntingdon had said this in his book “Clash of Civilizations,’ Russia is part of the West.
In general Western public are far less bothered about international politics. They are focused on everyday life issues, hence domestic politics dominates. Interestingly, public interest rises only when foreign policy conflicts are reported on Iran, North Korea and China. It’s obvious who the enemies are in most minds.
Various studies including election related ones have shown that most right wingers and ideological racists are in favour of military engagement with Muslim states and China. Due to voting reasons and strategy, it’s not easy to speak of engagement and win votes. And it was easier to deal with one “evil” power-Soviet Union- but after a spell of Muslim countries- Iran, Iraq, Syria- as super villains, China has emerged as the big one. It’s more uncomfortable because it has emerged to contest the US when life was supposed to be easier after the Soviet Union’s fall.
Read: Blinken and Xi pledge to stabilize deteriorated US-China ties, but China rebuffs the main US request
For the US, it’s easy to understand Russia but both China and the Islamic world present a face they don’t know how to handle. They have nothing in common with these “Villains”.
China not “White” ?
Apart from the obvious race connotations which are globally common, such colour codes do denote power plays as well. Human History began with the Blacks, then moved to the Whites and the Yellow challenge is now taking place. The combined economic strength of the South East Asian countries including Japan and China are huge and they form a racial bloc as well. Any ‘racial “transition concept is denied in international politics and academia or that it isn’t a major but it does exist as fact. Hence China as a contestant is not just an economic power but a civilizational and cultural competitor as well.
Read more: Blinken to meet Xi, State Department says, in bid to ease US-China tensions
The recent Wagner episode shows that Russia is indeed weaker and its model of outsourced warfare carries inherent problems too. And this weakened Russia means the anti-Western axis is increasingly coming under China’s leadership though how effective one is not sure. What it does say is that the obvious failure to end the war and the more obvious failure to use the war by both sides - Russia and the West- to gain proves once more the limits of Western supremacy has been seen.
And that makes China even more visible than before and so is its perception as a threat.
Disclaimer: Views expressed here are of the writer.
China’s new foreign policy law: Its potential impact on global politics
As of Saturday, 1st of July, China’s foreign policy is being conducted within the framework of the new ‘Foreign policy Law’, adopted by the Standing committee of the National Peoples’ Congress, the country’s highest legislative body. It comes when China’s relations with the United States are at their nadir, with a burgeoning bi-partisan perception of China in the US as the principal adversary in the global arena. It is one of the very few areas where there is a conceptual agreement between the principal foes in the American domestic political scene, President Joe Biden and the former President Donald Trump. At least on this it appears that there is nary any sunlight between them. It does not bode well for the prospects of a peaceful world in the times ahead.
But what does the new ‘Law’ entail and why did China find it necessary to adopt and announce it at this point in time? At present there are 52 laws pertaining to foreign affairs in China and 150 others that contain clauses that influence how China relates to the rest of the world. However, now that China perceives that the adversarial competition with the US and the West in general is almost structural, it feels that there should be greater focus on buttressing its basic legal system further to address the growing concerns safeguarding national sovereignty, security and development interests. The Chinese authorities believe that the new law would help strengthen China’s image as a responsible major global actor championing peace, development and mutual benefit. Also, according to a Western scholar, Moritz Rodolf of the Yale Law School, the law affords Beijing a “broad room “for interpretation on how to apply international treaties domestically.
QU Dongyu of China re-elected FAO Director-General
The new law, adopted on 28th June, comprises six chapters incorporating 45 articles. While expounding China’s positions on international exchanges, the law emphasizes that “opening up to the outside world is necessary for ‘mutual benefit’ and is a fundamental policy of the government. It underscores China’s commitment to developing foreign trade, actively promoting and protecting, in accordance with the law, inbound foreign investment, encouraging external economic cooperation including outbound investment, and promoting high-quality development of the ‘Belt and Road Initiative’ (BRI). It affirms China’s commitment to upholding the multilateral trading system, opposing unilateralism and protectionism, and working towards an open global economy.
Importantly, the law also focusses on safeguarding national sovereignty, and development. It iterates China’s right to take appropriate measures to counter acts that endanger its sovereignty, security and development interests in violation of international law or norms governing international relations. It stresses that China will protect the legitimate rights and interests of its citizens, and its other overseas interests against any threat or infringement. Clearly these are indicators of big-power behavior, a status to which China obviously is persuaded that it has graduated.
Just a day after Blinken’s Beijing visit to stabilize US-China relations, Biden calls Xi Jinping a ‘dictator’
Interestingly, the law promises to provide a “Chinese approach to advancing the international cause of human rights”. It does not, however, elaborate on how the “Chinese approach” would vary from currently held views on those values. The law critiques the countries of the West without naming them, who tend to extend overseas the “longarm jurisdiction” of their domestic laws. It describes such “long arm jurisdiction” as a “showcase of hegemony, “of which China is a victim. China strongly opposes these tendencies, the Law stipulates.
This new piece of Chinese legislation was explained further by China’s top diplomat, Wang Yi. In recent times the US has imposed sanctions on a long list of Chinese companies and individuals, accusing them of complicity in human rights abuses, which China has vehemently denied. Some of these sanctions have gravely affected China’s ability to access the critical technology required for semiconductors. Also, these have forced many Chinese firms to cut back on jobs and halt any expansion plans. Terming such actions as “bullying” from abroad, Wang Yi published a media article arguing that this law would help counter such acts. The law, in his words, is “an important measure to strengthen the Communist Party Central Committee’s centralized and unified leadership over foreign affairs “. Wang Yi clarified his views on what really lay at the root of China’s decision to propound the law in the manner that it did. He said: “Facing severe challenges, we must maintain our strategic capacity… and deftly use the weapon of the rule of law to continuously enrich and improve our legal ‘toolkit’ in the struggle with overseas (powers)”.
US and China are talking at a high level again, but their rivalry remains unchecked
The Law is also a creeping advance on the concept of President Xi Jinping’s Zhang Guomeng or ‘China Dream’, which initially, at the outset of the last decade, comprised mainly a combination of the ideas of a ‘new kind of big-power relationship with the US’, a ‘win-win’ interaction with all other countries, and the stimulating of domestic demand for Chinese manufactures. Later, the idea of a broadened version of the ‘Old Silk Road’ was added, calling it the “Belt and Road Initiative” (BRI), linking nations across continents with a network of communication and mega-projects. The current law also seems to incorporate the more recent thoughts on the ‘Global Development Initiative’, ‘the Global Security Initiative’, and the ‘Global Civilization Initiative’. It seems that all these components are being constantly sharpened and honed as the ‘China Dream’ is being recalibrated, almost as a continuing process, to respond to changing international scenarios.
China obviously has come a long way since Deng Xiaoping’s advice to his people to “hide (their) capabilities” and ‘bide (their) time’. The new Law seems to suggest that the Chinese now believe China is not simply ‘rising’; it has already ‘risen’. Obviously, the Chinese sense that there is now a felt-necessity that values on such universal principles as “human rights” are necessary to be projected as part of their external doctrine, even if these be formulated within the paradigm of a “Chinese approach”. Nations will look to a greater understanding of what these values would entail and to what extent these would be in consonance with their current aspirations. It is evident of course that China is quietly moving to position itself pivotally on the globe. World politics of the near future will be determined by how the West, and in particular the US, reacts to this phenomenon.
Dr Iftekhar Ahmed Chowdhury is the Honorary Fellow at the Institute of South Asia Studies, NUS. He is a former Foreign Advisor (Foreign Minister) of Bangladesh and President & Distinguished Fellow of Cosmos Foundation.
The views addressed in the article are his own.
He can be reached at: isasiac @nus.edu.sg
A splendid portrait of the third cow child
Naeem Mohaiemen’s book arrival news was doing the rounds on social media for a while and had generated a great deal of interest. It was recently launched by ULAB Press and Nokta amidst enthusiasm. It’s a very brave book if one may say as it discusses arts of all topics including its impact on society and beings.
The author shares its pages with other writers and artists as well making it a fascinating act of literary art. It is more curated than edited if one may say. And that is what makes this book, words that are barely readable mixed with fuzzily printed pics so interesting to elderly eyes as that of this reviewer. Never mind, younger eyes will get it and the spirit of the season is the king.
Paris burning: Trouble in the 'sushil' paradise
It’s a very confident book, confident of what it wants to say and to whom as well. The book has certainly made its point and the target audience will really appreciate the musings. The literati with a touch of glitterati and those with less as well will truly appreciate the book. The rest of the lot will be laying hands on a book which takes arts seriously and that is a mighty rare book in Bangladesh indeed.
The third child syndrome
The title, in so many ways, sums up not just the time and place of the author’s Bangladesh but its geography as well. The restless third of the cow springing around because it can’t get a nip at the mother cow’s udders aptly describes Bangladesh. All noise and dance but milk has a queue and the third has to await its turn too. History so cleverly captured the eternal land of shudros, playing North India’s heir to India and its Muslim version called Pakistan. Or could it have a different cow-mother?
Why a cry for democracy shouldn’t be a cry for destabilisation in Bangladesh
“Midnight's Third Child” by Naeem Mohaiemen is a collection of essays on Bangladeshi visual art and artists in several forms and shapes and sizes. Other topics are touched on too including a touch of examining the role of an artist as one of the producers of history.
Naeem dwells on other issues in passing too ranging from the CHT marginalization to street movements to Dhaka’s eroding greenery. In some sense, it’s this very variety that becomes the theme of the book as it tries to come to terms with a reality that is built rather than organic. Going by the way he looks at largish avenues shorn of green and wonders where have all the grass gone, the guilty pleasure of owning one of those fancy apartments of some of this book’s readers may be a trifle more.
Between the lines, among the pages
There is so much missing in Bangladesh and not just the green. It’s the least of the three -India, Pakistan and Bangladesh baby-cows in every space particularly caste. It's full of peasants whose souls were probably captured best by the man who did so much to end Pakistan — Ayub Khan — who said Bangladeshis were a bunch of mother obsessed Hindu inferiors. That mother focused child image never leaves us and we never let go.
Wagner and Putin: What really happened?
Except for the fanatic patriot everyone apologizes for being a Bangladeshi. And it’s on this very difficult terrain indeed that Naeem has chosen to spend his eyes and heart. Not just his own but that of others as well who dwell on this very conflicting mental space. How do you discuss your sort of “rogue ancestors” if one goes by FB conversations, in discussing Bangladesh? To his credit, he does it quite enchantingly.
Naeem speak
Naeem Mohaiemen belongs to a special breed of Bangladeshis, the eloquent elite who have a fantastic Western education and then continue to distribute it to the Westerners, no mean feat. It permanently banishes any stigma, past, present, future in Bangladesh. Life can’t be easy for a soul like him who is so sensitive and yet has written eloquently questioning the soul of his own land.
It’s this “ask” which defines so much of what he says. As Zafar Sobhan said at the launch, “Naeem has always put Bangladesh, Bangladeshis, and the Bangladeshi intellectual world at the heart of his writing and the heart of his art.” (The Daily Star). That is not an easy task no matter where one lives.
South Asia goes for strategic polyamory
He has produced documentaries, almost historical and of expired history too if one will. He wonders at the role of “nations and shushils” as the land moved through passages of time, based on so many histories which the proxy middle class rules the roost. 1952, comes and goes and becomes a myth that is robust enough to serve endless generations or even more.
He sees culture workers as resistance artists of sorts as they are bundled in protests and waiting for the first bullet to be fired and become larger than life, certainly death, even as the bodies lie still (page 88+). That narrative goes on and on proving once more that given its hugely limited space in Bangladesh society where social media has completely overwhelmed the shushil art forms which the book deals with, they survive.
And Naeem Mohaiemen pays serious attention to that. Not many do and yet he has done so with great compassion and the passion of a believer and the mind of a professional intellectual. In the end, it’s almost a book of aspirant sacrosanct intentions, muted yes but still there…
Not just himself…
The sheer size of the artist’s paddy fields that he has tilled is the most admirable part of the book. Be it photography, documentary films or landscape gardening, Naeem has not lost sight of that. He seems to be ferociously territorial, wanting to say it all, even as he tries to remain low keyed and shares the book’s page with others.
Serajul Alam Khan dies: Enigmatic personality, influential politician
Yes, it matters he says and in stating that he wants to prove that it’s not the earth shattering changes they triggered that could be claimed but that they did respond and react to history. In 1952, nobody may fully know barring a few how many died in the processions and who by stray bullets but it no longer matters. Memory and art have overcome reality to become history.
As history moves on, all the dead become part of a long procession of souls who are sea changed into martyrs and that produce more history in return even as the monuments and memorials are washed with the colors of memory and forgetting. Art triumphs indeed. And so does the book in the author’s splendid gaze guiding his hands and words.
Midnight’s Third Child: Naeem Mohaiemen; Published by Nokta in association with the ULAB Press. March 2023
Paris burning: Trouble in the 'sushil' paradise
Paris is on fire and it’s not just in reality but metaphorically as well. A North –African 17 tear old delivery boy called Nahel was killed at a traffic stop when police stopped him and then he at some point tried to start his car. A policeman fired on him from close range to apparently stop him and he was killed. The police initially made up stories that he was a threat to their life etc so they fired but video records showed otherwise.
Finally, the authorities owned up to the killing and have now pressed charges against the policeman. Meanwhile, Paris is up in flames as protests raged across the poor districts where most migrants of North Africa live. Nahel’s mother Mounia led marches in her area.
Unlike previous times, the authorities can’t blame that the boy was a jihadi or something and draw attention away from the police action. He was a simple lawbreaker and nothing political about it.
The land most “shushils” think is the paradise of human rights, ideas, and freedom has been acting remarkably unlike one, going by media reports.
North African and Muslim
What Western media has carefully managed to avoid is the fact that the killed boy is of North African descent and all North Africans are from French colonies and all are Muslims. The objective is obvious. Both France and the West want to avoid a global backlash and turn it into a cause of Muslims particularly during the hajj. The French are the most repressive of all colonial powers and have a systemic oppression policy against its ex-colonial subjects living in France, mostly Paris.
The anger against the French government and state is therefore socially led by the most denied group. To this has been added resentment against the near license given to the police to act as it wishes to preserve law and order. President Macron vigorously defended the police after the killing, saying it’s not their fault but that of an individual policeman. That the individual policeman is a product of the system may have escaped the President’s mind.
The violent protests
For the first couple of nights, it was the fireworks and flames. The police were outnumbered and couldn’t control the situation. Their number went from 9,000 to 40,000 immediately. But the media reports that it isn’t working. Street reports say that the police are acting more like cover for the fire crews . Once a fire is doused, they move on and the crowd is back in charge.
It's easy to say that the disorder can't just go on, but so far that's exactly what has happened. It won’t go on for long but the problem remains alive till the next outburst.
What France needs is a solution and it doesn’t have exactly that ingredient.
Wagner and Putin: What really happened?
Western media is lamenting the aborted “mutiny” by the Wagner Group's forces which they hoped would topple Vladimir Putin. What they were describing as the biggest challenge ever posed to Putin's grip on power, was eventually put down without a shot being fired. Putin is still in power and Wagner seems to have slipped as a potential threat to the Russian supremo. The story is a complex one, as it shows how the many forces including clandestine ones are involved in the Ukraine war on both sides.
Also read: Wagner chief breaks his silence after aborted mutiny
A chef's army?
Yevgeny Prigozhin is a colourful character who has remained in the Kremlin's orbit in some form or the other (including engagements that earned him the nickname 'Putin's chef') throughout the 23 years that Putin has ruled Russia. He has said he founded the Wagner Group PMC (private military contractor), modelled in form and function on Blackwater, an American PMC that enjoyed heavy deployments in Iraq and Afghanistan, in 2014. Working as an auxiliary force under the Russian army's command, Wagner forces marked their presence in a number of countries where Russian troops were deployed over the last decade or so, from Syria to Mali.
Also read: US, NATO had no involvement in Wagner's 'short-lived' revolt in Russia: Biden
Last Saturday (Jun. 24) though, Prigozhin seemed to flip that script, as he mobilised around 8,000 of his men to march against Moscow. Western media outlets were quick to seize upon Prigozhin's public outbursts and frustration with the military leadership aired in recent weeks to conclude he had launched 'a coup'. To be fair, he himself was calling it “a march for justice”. At best, he was hoping to capture the Russian defense ministry in Moscow. Additionally, he demanded the resignation of the defense minister, Sergei Shoigu and the chief of army staff, Valery Gerasimov.
Wagner forces were apparently being led towards Moscow by its other founder Dmitri Utkin, a decorated former soldier who probably calls the real shots in the group (Prigozhin has no military experience to speak of) but last appeared in public in 2016. It all seemed serious enough that the mayor of Moscow actually cancelled all public events in the city scheduled for the following week, as if anticipating a bloody struggle for the capital once Wagner's convoy reached the city limits. But just as abruptly as it had all erupted, the Wagner rebellion fizzled out. Just 120 miles from Moscow, the convoy stopped and turned around.
Also read: Russian defense minister makes first public appearance since mercenary revolt as uncertainty swirls
Prigozhin himself never moved from his HQ at Rostov-on-Don, a garrison town near the Ukrainian border that Wagner now controls. From there he tried calling old friend Putin, who refused to talk to him.
Prigozhin suddenly found himself without the promised support, no mass movement, his troops facing certain annihilation and his family exposed to unspeakable danger. So he sought the support of old ally Alexander Lukashenko, the president of Belarus, to plead on his behalf. It worked - at least to the extent that he was provided safe passage into the arms of Lukashenko.
With Putin hovering in the background, a deal was struck. Prigozhin for now remains in exile in Belarus. Treason charges would be dropped. The Wagner army, said to number anywhere between 20,000 to 50,000 in total, would be offered contracts to be absorbed into the Russian army, or to exit home. Many have signed up.
Six months in the making?
Prigozhin had reportedly been planning this move for months, building up the situation by accusing the Russian army of corruption, failure to support him and losing the Ukraine war itself. In response the Russian army announced, all Wagner members would have to sign contracts and submit to Russian army orders.
Prigozhin refused and claimed the Russian army was attacking him.Unconfirmed reports on social media also say he made contacts with Ukrainian military intelligence around January this year. Others say he was instigating forces within Russia as well against Putin. Wagner is itself a product of Russian military intelligence, the GRU and Wagner co-founder –Utkin- is a GRU special operator.
So Russian military politics was part of the plan and it’s quite possible that he may have been egged on by forces within the Russian security apparatus who are anti-Putin, or at least anti-Shoigu & Gerasimov.
But the fact remains that no uprising took place as some expected whether from the civil or military forces.
War, ambition and exile
While it lasted, Wagner forces took down Russian helicopters and a transport aircraft killing almost forty personnel. This made accommodation by the Russian army impossible. Prigozhin was also accused of corruption: his companies sell goods apparently at inflated prices. Those contracts were canceled a week or so before Prigozhin went full-on rogue.
But the most serious accusation made by his foes is not just about the deals with Ukraine’s secret intelligence services, but the United States too. As these can’t be confirmed, they mean that whether true or not, Wagner can’t operate independently.
What didn’t happen in Russia was a general uprising and an open fracturing of the security apparatus. But it's obvious that the Russian military is rife with clandestine deals, conspiracies and lack of a common cause and leadership.
'Protest, not mutiny'
Speaking before leaving for his exile in Belarus, Prigozhin said his actions were a protest against the order to be placed under the Russian military and not an uprising. He also regretted shooting down the planes that caused so many deaths.
Putin meanwhile, thanked his armed forces for not just preventing an uprising but a civil war as well, even though they seemed to be enjoying a weekend off. As ever, nothing is certain and everything remains as mysterious as before in this “war of secrets.”
Why a cry for democracy shouldn’t be a cry for destabilisation in Bangladesh
Earlier this month, six Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) sent a letter to Josep Borrell, high representative of the European Union for foreign affairs and security policy, and asked him to step in to ensure free and fair election in Bangladesh – if need be, under a caretaker government. The Embassy of the European Union in Dhaka considered it as solely their personal views, not those of the EU. Prior to that, six congressmen sent a letter to US President Joe Biden, asking him to protect the “persecuted” religious and ethnic minorities in Bangladesh. The timing of the letters is noteworthy, considering the visit of the UN Under-Secretary-General for Peace Operations, Jean-Pierre Lacroix, to attend the preparatory conference of the UN peacekeeping ministerial in Dhaka on June 25-26.
Let’s deal with the issues one by one. First, let’s delve into elections under the caretaker government system, then the state of minorities in Bangladesh, and lastly, the geopolitical connotations of the abovementioned letters.
Read more: Letter from 6 members of European Parliament reflects views of signatories, Ambassador tells UNB
Bangladesh Awami League was at the forefront of demanding a caretaker government in 1996. The erstwhile BNP government had to succumb to the popular demand articulated by the Awami League. AL came to power through free and fair election under the non-party caretaker government. In 2001, Awami League handed over the power peacefully, for the first time in Bangladesh’s history, to a caretaker government. AL got 40.13 percent of votes compared to BNP’s 40.97. The former secured only 62 seats and the latter, 193 seats. The Four Party Alliance, including BNP and Jamaat-e Islami, formed the government and got a two-thirds majority in the parliament required for amending the constitution. They raised the retirement age of the chief justice of Bangladesh, so that their chosen Chief Justice of Bangladesh KM Hasan could be the Chief Adviser to the next caretaker government – a move many political analysists refer to as “corrupting” the caretaker government system. The last nail was hammered by Iajuddin Ahmed, the then President of Bangladesh, who assumed the role of chief adviser to the caretaker government. The Supreme Court of Bangladesh declared this caretaker government system “illegal” in 2011.
Without an iota of doubt, our democracy is not perfect. We need to develop our democratic institutions, and we need support from our friends in the democratic West for building and strengthening the democratic institutions. But supporting a cause with no democratic future will not help Bangladesh progress in this regard.
Read more: 6 congressmen’s letter to Biden a ‘false projection’ of the state of Bangladesh’s minorities, community leaders say
The letter from six US congressmen to President Biden accuses the current Bangladesh government of “persecuting” ethnic and religious minorities along with other allegations. Several noted minority community leaders have already rejected this assertion, calling it “absolutely false projection” of the state of minorities in Bangladesh. Advocate Rana Dasgupta, leader of Bangladesh Hindu Buddhist Christian Oikya Parishad, called the claim “a travesty of truth.” Bangladesh Buddhist Federation called it “baseless and fabricated.” Nirmal Rozario, president of Bangladesh Christian Association, also rejected the six US congressmen’s claim of persecution of the Christian community in Bangladesh.
The Awami League government reintroduced secularism in the constitution of Bangladesh. It also made provisions relating to the protection and advancement of the cultures of ethnic minorities of Bangladesh in the constitution.
The Bangladesh government was not always successful in fulfilling its commitments enshrined in the Chittagong Hill Tracts Peace Accord. However, we must not forget that this peace accord was made possible by the Awami League government back in 1997.
Read more: Letters from 6 MEPs and 6 US congressmen: Netizens point out curious similarities, including misspelling Bangladesh PM’s name
Let’s get to the heart of the problem. We are at a watershed moment in the geopolitical history of Bangladesh. Not by our choosing, our country has become a playground of international politics. It is both comforting and concerning. Comforting, because our economic development along with other things has made us geopolitically important. Concerning, because we have become a bone of contention between China and the US. Earlier, it was thought that BNP was a natural ally of China and Awami League was an ally of India. Interestingly, this has changed due to the dynamic leadership of Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina. She adopted her father’s foreign policy of “friendship to all, malice towards none.” She extended her hand of friendship to both India and China – two regional powerhouses and competitors. She was never hostile to the United States. However, under the Trump administration, the US was folding its carpet of influence in South Asia – relying mostly on India on issues relating to Bangladesh. China has expanded its reach in Bangladesh and other countries in South Asia. Now, Western leaders seem to be waking up to this rise and expansion of Chinese influence in South Asia and beyond. Perhaps they feel the time is ripe for them to mount pressure on Bangladesh, disregarding the concern that this could instigate violence and instability in the region that might hamper their interests as well as those of Bangladesh and its neighbours.
Bangladesh, argues Jared Cohen in his article “The rise of geopolitical swing states” (Goldman Sachs, May 15, 2023), is a geopolitical swing state. The foreign policy stance of the present Bangladesh government, i.e., “friendship to all, malice towards none”, gives it strategic autonomy. It enforces the international relationship dynamics of no permanent friendship or permanent enmity. China opposed Bangladesh’s independence, of course, not to the extent of the US, in 1971. Despite that, Bangladesh never hesitates when it comes to Chinese and American investments. Bangladesh has engaged in multi-alignment, not in non-alignment. Jared Cohen thinks that non-alignment is not possible in today’s world. Perhaps he is right. To protect national interests, however, Bangladesh should remain non-aligned, even in the face of increasing geopolitical pressure – of which, the recent letters of US congressmen and members of the European Parliament are a few examples.
The writer is former chairman of National Human Rights Commission, Bangladesh.