প্রিয় মার্ক

By Elora Zaman

বাংলাদেশ নামের একটি ক্ষুদ্র দেশের অখ্যাত এক গ্রাম থেকে লেখা একটি চিঠি। ফেইসবুকের প্রতিষ্ঠাতা মার্ক জুকারবার্গকে উদ্দেশ্য করে লিখেছে সে দেশেরই একটি মেয়ে। মেয়েটি ফেইসবুকের মাধ্যমে পৃথিবীর বাকি মানুষদের সাথে কানেক্টেড থাকতো আর জানতে পারতো চমৎকার এই গ্রহের অপর প্রান্তের মানুষদের চিন্তা ভাবনা, জীবনাচারন।

নীচের ই-মেইলটি সেন্ড করলাম। যারা বাংলা পড়তে আরাম বোধ করেন তাদের জন্য নীচে বাংলায় ও লিখেছি। সবাই যদি এরকম টুকটাক লিখে পাঠান তবে অন্তত বিনাযুদ্ধে সুচাগ্র মেদিনী দেইনি বলতে পারবো।

প্রিয় মার্ক,
অত্যন্ত দুঃখ ভারাক্রান্ত হৃদয় নিয়ে আপনার কাছে লিখতে বাধ্য হয়েছি। বিগতদিনে আমরা দেখেছি আপনি বিভিন্ন প্রাকৃতিক ও মানবিক বিপর্যয়ে অসহায় মানুষদের পাশে দাঁড়িয়েছেন। একজন মানবিক বোধ সম্পন্ন মানুষ হিসেবে আপনি বাংলাদেশীদের অন্তরে আছেন। সেই ভরসায় আজ কিছু বলতে চাই। জানিনা আমার এই চিঠি আপনি পাবেন কিনা। তবুও একান্ত অসহায় হয়ে লিখতে বসেছি।

আপনি হয়ত অবগত আছেন আমাদের সরকার এইদেশে ফেইসবুক বন্ধ করে দিয়েছে বেশ কিছুদিন হল। প্রায় চার কোটি ফেইসবুক ইউজারদের ইচ্ছে অনিচ্ছাকে বৃদ্ধাঙ্গুলি প্রদর্শন করে তারা আমাদের বাক স্বাধীনতা হরণের কার্যক্রম বহাল রেখেছে। এই সরকার জনগণের ভোটে নির্বাচিত নয়। তারা জোর করে মাত্র ৫% ভোটে ক্ষমতায় অবস্থান করছে। জনমানুষের জন্য তাদের চিন্তা নেই। জনগণের কথাকে তারা পাত্তা দেয়না। কেউ প্রতিবাদ করলেই হত্যা, গুম এবং বিভিন্ন ধরণের ভয় ভীতি দেখানো হয়। এদেশের প্রায় বেশিরভাগ জনগণ এখন প্রচন্ড অসহায় অবস্থায় দিনযাপন করছে। সরকারের বিপক্ষে যদি যৌক্তিক কোনো সংবাদ প্রচার করা হয় তবে সেই সংবাদ মাধ্যমকে বন্ধ করে দেয়া হয়। জনপ্রিয় কিছু সংবাদপত্র এবং টিভি চ্যানেল বন্ধ করে দেয়া হয়েছে ইতিমধ্যে এবং তাদের মালিকেরা এখন কারাগারে।

সরকারের ইচ্ছে কেউ তাদের অন্যায়ের বিরুদ্ধে কিছুই যেন না বলতে সাহস পায়। কিন্তু তারা হয়ত ভুলে গিয়েছে জোর করে দেশের সব মানুষকে ভয় দেখিয়ে নিজেদের দলে ভেড়াতে পারা যায়না। হিউম্যান ন্যাচার হল তারা অন্যায়ের বিরুদ্ধে প্রতিবাদ করবে। এদেশের মানুষেরা তাদের সেই প্রতিবাদ অব্যাহত রেখেছিলো আপনার অবদান তাদের প্রিয় ফেইসবুকে। যে ছেলেটি রাজনীতিকে ঘৃণা করে সেই ছেলেটিও ভয়ংকর এই সরকারের স্বৈরনীতির বিরুদ্ধে উচ্চকন্ঠ হতে বাধ্য হয়েছিলো প্রিয় মাতৃভূমিকে ভালোবেসে। নিজের দেশকে ধ্বংসের মুখে ফেলতে দিতে চায়নি সে। অথচ আজ তা দূরে থাক, সে তার প্রিয় বন্ধুটির খবর ও নিতে পারছেনা ফেইসবুক বন্ধ থাকায়। ফেইসবুক ব্যাবহার যেহেতু তুলনামূলকভাবে সস্তা সেহেতু কোটি কোটি মানুষ একে আপন করে নিয়েছে, বেছে নিয়েছে দৈনন্দিন জীবনের অংশ হিসেবে। এতই প্রিয় এই ফেইসবুক আমাদের কাছে যে একদিন এতে প্রবেশ না করতে পারলে যেন সময়কে অপূর্ণ মনে হয়।

অথচ দুঃখজনক হল, সরকার চাইছে আপনি আপনার এতসব ইউজারদের প্রাইভেসীকে উপেক্ষা করে তাদের সকল ইনফরমেশন সরকারের কাছে দিয়ে দেন। যেনো তারা ইউজারদের ধরে নিয়ে গিয়ে জেলে রাখতে পারে, হয়রানী করতে পারে কিংবা ভীতি প্রদর্শন করে তাদের বিরুদ্ধে না লিখতে বাধ্য করতে পারে। এই সরকারের দ্বারা বিগতদিনে ১৭ বছরের বালক থেকে শুরু করে বিশ্ববিদ্যালয়ের শিক্ষক পর্যন্ত গ্রেফতার হয়েছেন শুধুমাত্র ফেইসবুকে দুইলাইন লিখবার কারণে।

আশাকরি আপনি বুঝতে পারছেন আমরা কি ভয়ংকর পরিস্থিতির মধ্যে আছি। অন্যায় যে করে সে সর্বক্ষন ভয়ে থাকে, সবকিছুতেই ভয়ে থাকে যে এই বুঝি কেউ প্রতিবাদ করে ফেললো। আর তাই তারা প্রতিবাদী মানুষদের দমন করে কঠোর হাতে। সরকার ঘোষনা দিয়েছে আপনার সাথে চুক্তি করে ফেইসবুক ইউজারদের গোপন তথ্য জেনে নিয়ে তাদেরকে শাস্তির আওতায় আনা হবে। তারা এতই ভীত তাদের অপকর্ম নিয়ে। এবং ক্ষমতায় জোর করে থাকবার জন্য মরিয়া যেনো বিশ্ববাসী তাদের অন্যায় সমূহ সম্পর্কে জানতে না পারে আর তারা রুল করতে পারে অস্ত্রের জোরে, দমননীতি গ্রহণ করে।

এমতাবস্থায় আপনি যদি আমাদের আশ্বস্ত করেন যে আপনি এই কোটি কোটি জনগণের পাশে থাকবেন, কোনো স্বৈরাচারী সরকারের পাশে নয়, এই সরকারের গুটিকয়েক মানুষের ইচ্ছায় আপনি আমাদের প্রাইভেসী ব্রিচ করবেন না কিংবা আমাদের কোনো ব্যাক্তিগত ইনফরমেশন তাদের হাতে তুলে দেবেন না, তবে আমরা স্বস্তি পাই। এইজন্যই আপনার দৃষ্টি আকর্ষন করা। নিজ দেশের সরকারের বিরুদ্ধে লিখতে গিয়ে আমি বারবার কেঁদেছি। নিজেকে ধীক্কার দিয়েছি। তবে সরকার যখন মানুষের বিপরীতে অবস্থান নেয় শত্রুর মত, তখন একান্ত নিরুপায় হয়ে আপনাকে লিখতে বাধ্য হবার এই প্রয়াস ক্ষমাসুন্দর দৃষ্টিতে দেখবেন।

আল্লাহ আপনার মঙ্গল করুন। ভালো থাকবেন।
.
.

A young girl with her ever lush mind rediscovered herself in the contemporary world of networking and socialisation with free and fast paced information flow, as she wandered in the online virtual getaways from a physical location of a tiny village of a small country named Bangladesh. As the little world and yet so big that she lived in seemed to be on the verge of being shattered, she wrote a letter to Mark Zuckerberg. Facebook was not just more than a face and a book to her; it was her universe to her inquisitive amicable mind seeking to remain connected and informed of the lives and laughter of the people from the other side of the planet. She wrote:

Dear Mark,
I am compelled to write you this letter with a heavy heart. In the past, we have seen you have stood firmly beside the helpless people affected in various natural and humanitarian crises of the world. I can reaffirm that as a person with great sense of moral responsibility and principles, you have had always occupied an important place in the hearts of the Bangladeshis. It is this confidence that encourages me to say a few things through this letter, although I am unsure whether this letter will really reach you. However, I am writing it as I am totally helpless and do not see another option.

You may be aware that the government of Bangladesh has shut down access to facebook in Bangladesh for sometime now. By showing absolute disregard to the rights and preferences of some 40 million facebook users of Bangladesh, the government has kept on snatching our right of freedom of speech and expressions.

This government, as you may know, is not elected by people’s vote through a proper democratic process. They are just holding on to the power by force with a meagre 5% support of the total population. They possess no concerns for the people of the country whatsoever. They turn a blind eye to the opinion of the people. Anyone trying to protest against their evil intent and illegitimacies has to deal with their threats of murders, abduction or other forms of tortures and harassments. An overwhelming majority of the population is living helpless lives now a day. Any media broadcasting any news of utmost veracity but going against the government, is forcefully brought under complete closure. Already a number of popular newspapers and television channels have been oppressively closed down by the government, with their owners jailed in sheer isolations.

The Bangladesh government wants to create an environment so that no one can dare to exercise their right of freedom of expression, no matter how basic that could be, to say anything against them. However it looks like they have forgotten that it is not possible to keep all the people of the country intimidated and forced to be on their side. Inherent in human nature is to protest and remonstrance against all evils and injustices. With all options virtually ceasing to exist, the people of Bangladesh kept on their voices of protest heard so far through your unprecedented contribution: Facebook. Even the innocent young men who never affiliated themselves in politics, were bound to raise their voices out of their love for the motherland, to protest against the autocracies of the government using the facebook as their only platform. They didn’t want to let their country be pushed to the brink of collapse.

However, with the current shut down of facebook in the country, they are not even capable of connecting to their dear friends, let alone using facebook to pursue broader benefits and better causes. Because facebook is a complementary site for the account holders, millions of people of Bangladesh have embraced facebook as integral parts of their daily lives. We love facebook so much that any single day without accessing facebook seems rather unfulfilled.

However, it is very unfortunate that the government of Bangladesh wants you to provide the information of all the facebook users to them completely neglecting the privacy of these users. The government’s filthy intent is to arrest the users and keep them in custody, harass them or coerce them not to write anything against the government. In the past, many people, from a 17- year old lad to university professor have been arrested by the government only for writing something in facebook against the government.

I hope you understand what dire straits we are living in at the moment in this country. It is well known that the perpetrators and wrongdoers are always afraid of confronting protests against their evil deeds. Hence they tend to gruellingly repress the ones who protest and oppose, which is especially easy when they are the authorities themselves. The government of Bangladesh has announced that they will get into an agreement with you to access confidential information of the facebook users, to prosecute and bring them to judicial trial. The government is so frightened because they are fully aware of their misdemeanours and sins. They want to hold to the power by any means, by ensuring that the outside world remains ignorant of their mischiefs and they can continue their autocratic regime using guns and power to threaten and repress people.

Under the circumstances, it would be our ultimate relief to know that you will be beside the millions of us, and not with only a handful of people of the current autocratic oppressive government of Bangladesh, and you will not breach our privacy or provide any of our personal information to the government. This is what I wanted to draw your attention upon. Writing against the government of my own country has not been easy and I couldn’t resist shedding tears. I resented myself time and again. However, please forgive this endeavour of mine to be in touch with you and I hope you will understand how undone we are with the government taking a belligerent stance against its own people, which leaves us with no option other than to write to you to get our rights of freedom of speech and expression preserved through the facebook.

May Allah bless you! Stay safe.

Missed Calling: No Exit: November.

Missed Calling: No Exit: November.

 

                                                                                                                                    Seema Amin

The month of November, with its scheduled nascent coolness, has been the unofficial portent of a three month winter season of staged ‘culture’ for years; the capacious capital boasts its social capital (the synergies of its urban, global, and now, ‘trans-rural’ agglomerations) in established platforms like Hay (Dhaka International Literary Festival) and Bengal’s Classical Indian Music fest as well as the more recent ‘blockbusters’of Samdani Art Summit and BPL/ICC.  This year, rehearsed loudly in the habitual corporate brochures, event catalogues and free/ VIP registration circuits, a new entree has entered the menu of the spectacle.

The Dhaka International ‘folk’ festival, a rather pink fountain for variously colored thirsts—popular Lalon and Sufi exponents branded or re-branded ‘folk’ in the well-protected precincts of the Army stadium—had its debut, as highbrow, lowbrow and middlebrow sat in classified and declassified zones during the hallowed trinity– three nights of ‘Bliss’ not to ‘miss’ — together in concert as they almost never are, except possibly…. in queue on voting day. Ai! The month is a harbinger, too, of not only Jibananda’s once punctually rapturous rural winter and the hemanta harvesting of amon rice but the municipality polls, 2015. The barely audible static surrounding these polls, in contrast to the April 28 mayor polls, hardly interfered with our recreational sublime.  One would have to be exceptionally and easily bored to notice the odd man out in the rose-colored screen that dropped over the writer/publisher serial murders and the posthumously advertised petrol bombs of January: blue prison vans here and there, uploading busloads of new arrivals in the already overloaded Dhaka Central Jail. If one cared to, however, one might notice the bars of music synchronized to the bars of the prison vans, inside which only the hands of anonymous prisoners are visible…Outside Jahingar gate that opens to the cantonment where urban vintage and musical ‘enlightenment’ is tasted… zig-zagging traffic through Shahbag… No Prussian or electric blue, no warm or fluffy blue: the prison blue of the prison van.

On a sudden, if a staccato rhythm suddenly jerks our gaze and we see thirteen brown hands shaking the small bars that open to the outside world inside the moving penitentiary…our imagination might take us somewhere…quite far, as far as a Passage to India..or rather haphazardly…as mine did, to Grameenphone. I imagined, for I am particularly and peculiarly imaginative, that these thirteen hands, shaking the van for what it’s worth, picked up from god knows where, were missed calling the Dhaka Folk festival, the one that almost tempted me with its constellation of stars and the understated smell of dried roses.

Such an understatement: prison.  The headlines from September do not overstate the bodies it contains: 17,000 workers/activists of the (unofficial, major) opposition. The subheading on the front page of the Daily Star from November 21: Party Claims 500 of its prospective candidates detained this month. Elsewhere:  “Every day, three hundred of our workers are picked up…”  Forget the cases against 22,000 of its leaders and activists. Just count the number detained each day…hell, if there were three consecutive storms in the south not as many rickshawallahs could show up in the capital.

We live in insecure times, alias, very secured times. From bleeding Paris to burning Dhaka, a blanket of security, a grid of surveillance and its alter ego– mass arrest and mass detention, is thrown over us.  Before we had time to swallow the enormity of the ‘insecurity’ posed by five bloggers and a publisher killed in the last eight months, we were covered up in a ‘blanket of security’.   Before we could register the one-party municipal election we are about to enjoy, two eagerly awaited hangings were announced.  Thus, and so:

“Nirapothar chadore dheke rakha hoyechhe Dhaka Central Jail.”  Good, in fact thank you, but has the blanket been lifted since? Will this coldness, this fear, ever thaw? And did the blanket really come down that fateful night when history was served or was it already keeping us warm in an ever warmer earth?

Precedents are perhaps all we are about… “Amader first hote hobbe, tai na…” An IUB faculty and friend was sarcastically referring to biometric SIM registration and how we were proudly stepping into unchartered territory, with the exception of one or two African states.  Terrorism calls for terrific measures. But if the opposition, and its hundreds of thousands of supporters, is not a banned terrorist outfit—in spite of endless rhetoric that would have it even more illegitimate than Jamaat, not even just by association anymore—this form of ‘delegitimizing’ a political party would normally have the effect of delegitimizing the state that has declared an unofficial war against almost forty percentage of its population.

While the imprisonment of leaders before the nonetheless performed spectacle of petrol bombs during January’s post electoral blockade can be post facto argued as “pre emptive,” the pre-emptive ‘strike’ of November has no deductive or inductive logic behind it. It is simply justified—if it is justified at all, no one feels the need in a climate of generalized ‘terror’– by the suspicion of potential sabotage (albeit sabotage of ‘normalcy’ as much as anything else). One man’s sabotage is another man’s subterfuge:  will potential provocateurs and saboteurs, disciplined, remanded, be released in time for elections?  Discipline and Punish: just don’t make this spectacle so damn obvious.  News from yesterday: We are looking forward to Awami-Awami violence, in case we miss the normal bipartisan blood spilled.  Thousands languish in Bangladeshi prisons since time immemorial (that’s colonial Greenwich standard time); but the hundreds of thousands in prison now herald the zeitgeist of a new political age (If we are to look for precedents in our own history, the parallels could get tricky, from the Pakistani period to BAKSAL)

The question occurs, under what climate, in what world, through which discourse, can a society accept this form of ‘open’-literally, for many are in a permanent ‘makeshift’ prison in tents–incarceration of tens of thousands of its people? The grassroots workers in jail, those who ‘do’ the BNP (just as their counterparts who ‘do’ the Awami League), are not separate form this society.  Their party has not been declared ‘illegal’ or even ‘illicit’ as Jamaat’s has—even– rhetorically;  yet, by all means, if there is any path towards such a historic moment, then the mass detention of the (unofficial) opposition’s workers certainly entail that inexorable destiny. In world and national history it is one-party or one-man/woman dictatorships that have been synonymous with such mass detention (apart from episodes of ethnic cleansing, etc).

Not a few fingers point to a state that has one, inviolable source of legitimacy: the war crimes tribunal (i.e. a historic burden of Chetona).  In itself, it is no mean source, with genuine support if not national consensus, much more powerful than the regime’s growth rhetoric.  Yet, apparently it is not sufficient to ensure the sound sleep of our rulers, underneath that blanket of security: complete acquiescence seems necessary, the slightest divergence/dissent somehow points at the threat of a critical mass, ‘democracy’ seems as much a threat as ‘terror.’ Critical mass (the threshold on which the status quo one day dissipates) where the foundations cannot hold. Thought is almost as ‘unfree’ as action.

Again, let me repeat, not to say that AL does not have support, the highest members of the ‘culture literati’ paid homage to the PM for her ‘environmental achievements’ even as UNESCO finally expressed alarm at Rampal power plant in the Sundarbans.

But these same supporters, who ‘cover’ with a shroud of protective love, fierce rhetoric and sometimes, sometimes, genuine feeling, never even feel they have to answer why thousands of BNP’s workers are being rounded up before the polls, rather than—just for comparison’s sake– thousands of Jamaat’s workers before the verdict of a war criminal. The threat of the BNP organizing its grassroots workers (leaders in September declared they had begun work in 74 units) seems sufficient condition for such blatantly totalitarian actions by the regime.

But I have a proposition: remember how ‘we’ were comparing the BNP to the Naxals? Absurd to some, perfectly logical to others, but hey, for rationality’s sake/if not realpolitik: why don’t we just follow through and do what India did with them? Why don’t we declare them illegal? At least then that section of Bangladesh considering opposition politics as a legitimate form of protest will know that somehow their actions have crossed a boundary that never existed when their counterparts were in their place ( history begins and ends with the victors and why should this be different?)— know that they have been so ‘burnt’ in the eyes of the public, in poetic banners and graffiti all over town, that they are not allowed to function legally?

Look into the legal question.  Lock the terror away—no, confiscate, quarantine, suffocate, squelch, corner, liquidate… No…they will only throw blockbuster shows, while the prison vans carry them away…

Alas, the question is not legal.  In a country of one hundred sixty million people, if the forty percent of the population that constitutes BNP’s core vote is incarcerated and ‘incarcerable’, the prison-bail-remand industry becomes a lucrative source of profit.  And more importantly, virtually endless. Prison, after all, is not just perianal amusement, mind you, but often referred to as an industrial complex, with a vibrant economy.  In America, the ‘military-industrial’ complex has its own GDP, if you will.

One of the biggest (baddest, baby) ‘throwers’ of parties in Bangladesh is the military: so are the US Marines stationed here in Dhaka.  The military has always been a key player in Bangladeshi politics, but its cultural import should not be considered insignificant; for reasons both profound and ironic, it still inspires respect, awe and submission. The army stadium, just one platform for civic ‘togetherness’ is just a token ‘cultural refreshment’, only a mocktail after all, not a Molotov…

Now, this article is not another brick in the wall of the well-established discourse of a militarized, police state. Or an obituary for the opposition; or even, the slightest death threat to the ruling regime.  It is, if anything, a missed call to the uncritical ‘mass/class’ here and there orbiting November, December, January… To pretend everything is normal as long as the wheels of growth do not grind to a halt is the great virtue of the capitalist mode of production and, if you will, mode of ‘life’ and death. And, if anything, the ‘culture’ precedes the politics.

‘Art’ replaced God in the west a long time ago as the ‘opium’ of the m/asses, as a professor of literature in the University of Geneva once declared to me…The tourists may come to the biggest show in town in February, the Samdani Art Summit, through different borders than the dealers in arms, but the circuits of pleasure and pain somewhere do meet, perhaps in the no man’s land of spectacle. Oishi will have a noose on her neck, but the security forces and godfathers who deal in yaba will not.  War criminals who facilitated or participated in the torture of so many will hang but those who keep well-identified torture cells today will not. The age of the spectacle does not let us mourn the horrors of a terror attack or the loss of our freedoms long, sublimating everything into fear and/or joy,  lest we recognize other crimes, other criminals, repeating history piecemeal,  like the bullet-perforated path of a third world war. And the prison vans pass us by, on our way to the ‘theatre’. Yesterday’s news of ISIS, tomorrow’s news of Ansarullah Bahini, and a promise of more of the same.  Nothing, nothing between pleasure and pain, the keyboard set to this scale. No third taste, no minor chord.  Once in the theatre, that old Arabic root word next to the Latin: No exit.

No Country for Old Men: The Niloy Chatterjee killing and the roots of Violence in Bangladesh

Recent murder of Niloy Chatterjee, and the accompanying outcry, has again lead to the thesis in the domestic and  international media that religion, in this case Islam, is at the heart of all violence in Bangladesh. The article looks at depth into such reporting and seeks to answer the question: Is the current practice of Islam responsible for the recent upsurge in violence in Bangladesh?

By Surma

The Killing Fields of Bangladesh

baby

Picture of Baby shot in the womb of his mother in Magura, Bangladesh, by political cadres of the current ruling Awami League .

Bangladesh this summer again is revisited with the spectre of the another gruesome killing of an online activist, this time Niloy Chatterjee. The killing is not isolated but is part of an epidemic of disappearances, murder, torture and kidnappings which are occurring all over the country. Human Rights activist, at great risk, have tried to highlight this ‘dirty war’, pointing their collective fingers towards the current Awami League government and its security forces.

In Bangladesh, in this context of mainly state sponsored violence, there has been much discussion in social media, about the circumstances surrounding the Niloy Chatterjee’s death. Some commentators, came up with an interesting hypothesis, not attributing the gruesome killings to Ayman Zawahiri and Al Qaida, but that to other possible players. A good summary can be found in the writings of the social media activist Talukdar Shaheb.

It now appears, according to the domestic press in Bangladesh, that individuals connected to the ruling ‘secular’ Awami League government have been arrested, in particular a nephew of the Minister for Labour and Employment. In contrast to the vibrant discussion in Bangladesh surrounding Chatterjee’s death on social media, sadly many international journalists, it seems, are happy to ignore the present context and trot out the usual lazy stereotypes of starry eyed ‘Mad Mullahs’ running amok in Bangladesh.

A Bollywood Rerun of Burke’s Law

Burke's_lawniloy

‘Burke’s Law’, now solving international crimes: Above: Screenshot of TV Series Burke’s Law. Below: Picture of the late Niloy Chatterjee

One particular example of this type of lazy journalism is Jason Burke’s piece in the London Guardian, an investigative piece on the face of it but with closer reading, it becomes a pale imitation of US TV hit show Burke’s Law. In the TV series Amos Burke, a millionaire police captain, is chauffeured around in a Rolls Royce, simultaneously solving murders while sipping champagne and enjoying the high life. In our case Jason Burke is over thousand miles away in Delhi, chauffeured through the mental terrain of Bangladesh by his trusted sidekick Saad Hammadi, solving crimes in Bangladesh without having to step inside the country.

In the piece Jason Burke follows the age old technique of developing a distorted picture of Bangladesh for his readers. First he whitewashes the story in a strong solution of decontextualization, by failing to mention in detail the wider spate of killing and violence that has been engulfing the country for the past years. Second, he distorts his piece with unequal representation, there is a direct quote from Imran H Sarkar but no quotes from Conservative Muslims in Bangladesh that oppose Mr Sarkar. Thirdly this unequal representation, allows the picture to develop in a dark room of non being. Where one side is humanised, and has a name and simultaneously the Conservative Muslim voice, is dehumanised into mindless mob, tenuously linked to the murder  and transformed into non beings at the same time.

One is surprised that such epistemic racism is allowed to flourish at the left leaning progressive Guardian. Also I expected Jason Burke, being the Guardian’s expert on the ‘War on Terror’ (having authored four books according to the website), to have a more nuanced and thoughtful article. However when reading his other works in the newspaper I am not surprised. In a piece on key books on Muslim Extremism, Jason Burke summarises, ‘The Islamist’, an autobiographical work by the British Bangladeshi Ed Husain, as: “Excellent on the cultural gap between first generation Pakistani Immigrants and their children in the UK”. I guess according to Jason Burke and the application of his ‘Burke’s Law’, all us Pakis look the same!

(Paki is a derogatory term used by racists in the UK to describe all South Asians)

Burke’s article on Bangladesh follows the memes of many writings by Westerners on Bangladesh, who in essence argue that religion is at the heart of all violence in Bangladesh. This sentiment is echoed in academic circles, where even violence and repression perpetrated by the ‘Progressive and Secular’ Awami League government is blamed on religion. For example David Lewis at the LSE somewhat justifies government repression in Bangladesh, as a defensive posture against religious violence. Leading to the question, is religion, in our case Islam at the heart of all violence in Bangladesh?

The tradition of tolerance in Bangladesh

Jean-Leon-Gerome-396883

Interpreting the picture: Familiar medieval scene of congregation prayer, with a Qalandar (Baul) in the corner (right of the picture) left unharassed and tolerated by the orthodox members of the congregation. Ibn Taymiyyah in his Majmua al Fatawah, upholds the prevalent tradition, by advocating  tolerance of the unorthodox Qalandars.

Looking at the available data on violence in Bangladesh, majority of violence is either attributed to criminal gangs or state security forces. Even one looks at violence by political parties, two out of the three main players are secular, therefore using a rough rule of thumb majority of political violence in the country is non religious. This leaves us the theoretical question, is the practice and articulation of Islam in Bangladesh one that is necessary or in essence violent ? Again the historical and empirical data would suggest otherwise, historically and until the present day, dotted across many villages in Bangladesh Muslims and Hindus communities have coexisted together. Also contrary to popular perception, Islam in Bangladesh has never been monolithic nor uniform, with various theological schools within Sunni Islam, living side by side with no outbreaks of any sectarian violence.

As a way of explaining such discrepancies, many writers have posited the binary of Syncretic Bengali Islam vs Foreign Wahhabi Islam. Wahabi Islam gaining the upperhand in Bangladesh due to the unlimited oil money of the Saudis. Again looking at the empirical data the influence is negligible. For example, looking at the core and regular practice of prayer (namaz/salah),  in Saudi Arabia the practice is to pray with hands above the navel or single cycle of prayer (rakat)  performed for the late evening Witr prayer, but in Bangladesh, anecdotally wherever I went, everyone prayed with their hands below the navel and three cycles of prayers were performed for the Witr Prayer.

Sections of the elite as well as writers and journalists still continue with the argument, pointing not to quantifiable practices but to a an abstract foreign ‘Wahhabi’ ideology that has infected the body politic of Bangladesh, in particular the works of Ibn Taymiyyah.

Such theories appear to be convenient fig leafs for inconvenient facts, leaving more questions unanswered than solved. If the Wahabi movement has been around for over 200 years, if it is so powerful, why does it have an impact now? Why does Saudi Arabia, despite being bordered by the failed states of Iraq and Yemen, the motherland of such violent ideology, has a lower violence and crime statistics than Bangladesh and many Western countries? Why is this myth still peddled by elites, writers and journalists in Bangladesh, when it has already been debunked in academic circles?

An unbiased review of the current data and evidence, points to an alternative source to the violence that is engulfing Bangladesh. We should not be fooled  by the fact that the violence may be couched in religious symbols or language. The manipulation of religion is not a recent phenomena in Bangladesh, nor is it the sole prerogative of the ‘religious right’, it is a universal and established practice of the powerful. Who can forget the pronouncements of the ‘secular’ Awami League government, in following the Medinan Constitution or that no laws will go against Quran or Sunnah.

caption competition

Caption Competition Bangladesh: ‘Security Forces Foil Islamist Attack Against Civilised Folks’ or ‘The Haves in Bangladesh Keeping Under Their Heels the Have-nots’, you choose !

Rediscovering the Lost Art of Compromise

“When two elephants fight it is the grass thats gets hurt.”

African Proverb

Taking a step back from the present, without the prejudice against the sacred traditions of the land and looking back into the history of Bangladesh, the spikes in violence cannot be attributed to the constant of deep attachment the Bangladeshi people had for the sacred. The spikes of violence that we witnessed in our recent history in 1947, the crisis leading to and including 1971, the BAKSAL of 1973 and now the violence of the current political crisis, lies squarely instead at the inability of the elites of the country to come to a compromise rather than the religious beliefs held by the common people.

The roots of the present violence, sprout from the feet of the current Awami League Government. The crisis was sparked by the mishandling/politicisation of the War Crimes Trials and the suspension of free and fair elections. These unilateral steps by the Government has shattered the political consensus that existed  in the country since the 1990s. It has created a political vacuum, creating a winner takes all situation for the Government and and a do die situation for its opponents, thus giving the illusion of violence as the panacea for the malaise perceived by both parties.

On the other hand, International backers of the Awami League government either in Delhi or in the West, instead of restraining the violence, maintain and fan it. They are all too eager to prop up and paint the current crisis in a clash of civilisation colours. This manufacturing of a new front on the ‘War on Terror’, has the desired effect in justifying new budgets for their ever burgeoning Military Industrial Complex (cue the useful idiots of Bangladesh Studies).

The history of Bangladesh has not been a continuous orgy of violence, there have been long periods that did see stability and reduction of violence. The catalyst for the periods of peace, was the ability of the elites of the country to compromise. The first instance was in 1975, in a series outlined by the blogger Jyoti Rahman, it was Zia Rahman’s genius for compromise that steered the country from the initial chaos under the Awami League dictatorship, to stability and normalcy. The second period was the unified effort by all parties to depose the Ershad dictatorship and the formation of a new democratic political arrangement in the 1990s.It is the abandonment of this ancient wisdom of tolerance and compromise that has lead to the spate of violence in Bangladesh. Intolerance emanating from the elites feeding down to the common man in the street as innocent victims of collateral damage.

Looking at the privileged young marchers of Shahbag and their slogans, reading the opinions pieces and accompanying comments on Bangladesh, a silent melancholy sigh takes over the soul. I hear in my heart the lament of W B Yeats, in his poem Byzantium. The young have forgotten the age old wisdom of their elders, thus mistaking the onward march of intolerance with the onward march of progress…

“THAT is no country for old men. The young

In one another’s arms, birds in the trees

– Those dying generations – at their song,

The salmon-falls, the mackerel-crowded seas,

Fish, flesh, or fowl, commend all summer long

Whatever is begotten, born, and dies.

Caught in that sensual music all neglect

Monuments of unageing intellect”

W B Yeats – Sailing to Byzantium

shahbag rally375965038-torchlight-procession-torch-fire-deployment-reichstag

March to Progress or Intolerance? Left: Torchlight Rally at Shahbag and Right: Torchlight Rally in Nazi Germany

Further Reading:

  1. ‘Ibn Taymiyya’s “New Mardin Fatwa”. Is genetically modified Islam (GMI) carcinogenic?’ by Yahya Michot
  2. ‘Ibn Taymiyya against Extremisms’ by Yahya Michot
  3. ‘God’s Unruly Friends: Dervish Groups in the Islamic Middle Period 1200-1550’ by Ahmet T Karamustafa

A tale of two mockingbirds: Public reaction in Pahela Boishkah and echoing namelessness.

1

By Seema Amin

“The ‘they,’ as it were, can constantly have ‘them’ invoking it…”—   Heidegger

Easy does it. ‘They’ did it.      

In ‘To kill a mockingbird,’ Harper Lee described the subjectivism of human experience:  People generally see what they look for, and hear what they listen for. Justice, in this worldview, tends to ‘black out’, losing consciousness to a kind of societal tunnel vision. Atticus Finch, protagonist in that American classic, saw mockingbirds as epitomes of harmlessness, innocent songbirds that should not be prey to the predator.  But in the natural world, mockingbirds are characterized by quite another ‘gift’. Mockingbirds mimic other birds. The song of the mockingbird is a song of the average, a kind of adjusted polyglot’s mean of birdsong…

The culture of ‘public reaction’ in Bangladesh today is an echo chamber of mockingbirds, not too distant from the cultures of resistance/s. The same coterie, friends, networks, who ‘resisted’ together for forty years resist on. They sign together, dine together, sing and fight together.  Yet around them the ‘culture’ of corruption—the three muskateers of political, social, sexual corruption–has not changed terrifically, much as the colors of our national holidays remain heroically the same, strutting ‘freedom’, tradition, and ‘progressive liberal values’ all at once, singing the song of the average.

Heidegger’s treatment of the ‘They’ in Adorno’s The Jargon of Authenticity, plumbs the concept of ‘averageness’ in a culture of exchange:  ‘Being-with-another’ concerns itself with averageness…Thus the ‘they’ maintains itself factically in the averageness of that which belongs to it, of that which it regards as valid and that which it does not, and of that to which it grants success and that to which it denies it… This care of averageness reveals in turn an essential tendency of Dasein which we call the ‘leveling down’…of all possibilities of being.” Complex as it sounds, Adorno makes this concept concrete when he describes a world born of phrases, chatter, giving birth to a   ‘reality that arose in the name of culture.’

A few days after the coordinated public ‘humiliation’/molestation/ dare I say—rape– of more than twenty women in Dhaka University’s TSC, Information Minister Inu described the style of the ‘attack’ as ‘Talibaneque.’ It would take the Taliban of course, or Isis, or, at the very least, Ansarullah Bahini, to get away with—ehm–this crime of ‘no name’ that Rahnuma Ahmed, in 2010, named in an article entitled, “Chatra League and sexual violence, A wide spread state of denial,” after incidents of sexual harassment in the same Raju Chottor area in Pahela Boishakh. In 2015, of course, it would take the Taliban. And this, though the security is beefed up more each year, audibly to stem any miniscule threat of ‘militancy’, cultural harassment, etc. We heard the same stories of extraordinary security measures, special RAB and police booths as in Ekushey and Boi Mela, when blogger Abhijeet Rai was silenced forever.  And yet, in spite of everything, the same exact venue remained ‘outside of the jurisdiction’ of security. No surprise. They—the Taliban– control Shahbagh after all. They won the spoils of that war in 2008. They mark their territory, we circle in their piss. They came from underground terrorist tunnels behind TSC, they were handed over by Nandi to the police, who, in turn, were so enamored with the most wanted terrorists of Bangladesh that they released them, did not even take a second glance at the now famous ‘bearded man’ seen repeatedly near the scene on the cameras…Beards get alarming only in the aftermath.  But of course! The terrorists control Shahbagh.

In spite of detailed reports in the print media immediately after the incident, recounting sexual harassment in Jagannath by Chatra League on the same day as the spectacle at TSC, the TV media mediated an Islamic threat soon after, reporting what could well be a clue, or a red herring, that the state’s mouthpieces were only to eager to echo. Meanwhile, the weight of the ‘evidence’ veered towards the song of the average. Women’s rights activists, university professors, writers, even students, seemed caught between explaining the endemic environment of sexual harassment and ringing the alarm bell over a threat to the national (secular) culture of Pahela Boishakh. Exceptions to note: some referred back to the pages of history, the 1998 protests over serial rape by Chatra League cadres in Jahingnagar University; some hinted at the political patronage that creates impunity. But the echo chamber, where the mockingbirds flocked quickly, swiftly sang the song of the Rooster of the morning after, who announced with alarm the usual, and yet, unusual suspects. Chatter flits between half truth and an incomplete lie.

In a thorough report in the Dhaka Courier (24 April) the culture of impunity in rape and sexual harassment prevalent even in ’73 is mentioned, alongside the historical marker of ’71 regarding rape. Afsan Chowdury’s purported claim that the destigmatization of rape was ‘the most significant’ legacy of Pakistan, that the ’71 breakdown of norms regarding public rape allowed impunity regarding rape  to become the norm, is intriguing; Bangladesh, however, did not merely continue impunity for Pakistani and razakar rapists, they gave impunity for rapists from our own freedom fighters. War has always involved rape and the notion that it takes such a violent ‘breakdown’ for the patriarchal norms in peacetime to change should raise some questions. In any case, today if we continue to thank Pakistan for the ‘destigmatiziaton’ of pubic rape we may as well blame patriarchy and its normalization of sexual violence on Pakistan in independent Bangladesh. Afsan Chowdhury himself is quoted elsewhere saying that power and privilege provides impunity to rapists; and has that power not changed hands? Only from man to man, state to state, old patronage, new patronage. Merely.

The report’s own description of Chatra League’s shame provides some clue: “DMP Joint Commissioner Munirul said they were working on releasing the suspects’ photos taken from screenshots of the footage. But in a related development, popular website Moja Loss had to wrap up their social awareness work done through the site after using the CCTV footage to identify some of the perpetrators and providing links to their Facebook pages. Many of the identified louts were found to be members of the Bangladesh Chhatra League, the student wing of the ruling party.”

The same report mentioned Chatra Union Dhaka University unit’s president Liton Nandi’s witness of men who were saying “record this Record this! We will never get such a view again.”  Ironically, the ‘view from camera 16”, the one camera from which footage has not  been released but which was placed in the area where the more ‘nameless’ acts occurred, may well also never be the same again. It is easy to doctor footage once so much time has passed. And given the way the security forces and state has reacted so far, a state so willing to ‘set the record straight’….one can, I suppose, only believe our authorities ‘innocent until proven guilty.’  Alas, still, the footage needs to be released, if only for us to know the full extent of what Rahnuma called a ‘nameless crime.’ The New York times live website recently did an article on “Sunitha Krishnan, the woman  who made the bold and controversial move of posting real footage of men raping women on the Internet” and how it led to the identification of rapists following the 2012 New Delhi rape, among other cases.

Rahnuma Ahmed, in the 2010 article, ventured that the widespread ‘state of denial’ regarding Chatra League’s involvement in rape was slowing shaking. Did it? Has it? Does the crime have a name? In spite of commendably large, widespread and energetic protests following this year’s event, the chatter in the echo chamber seems to fall squarely in the center of the cesspool of events of the last few years where impunity has prevailed, and where,  on the occasion someone is indicted the public largely remains skeptical that the actual criminals were found.

For so many reasons, my suspicions are with the most likely suspects, not the usual suspects, given the weight of history, the precedents of 2010, the particular style and nature of the assaults and the simultaneous assaults in Jagannth University on the same day, and the reining in of Chatra League’s women by the party following their desire to protest the incidents; and, and, and. But I maintain reasonable doubt. I ask myself, if an Islamic militant wanted to make a point with this coordinated lechery, what is the point ‘they’ would make? I know the mockingbirds’ answer: To intimidate those who practice ‘Bengali culture.’ But I get lost in irony.  Point: Today, like every day, women are subject to public and private abuse simply because of the fragrance they carry of ‘womanhood.’ That fragnance is ‘apparent weakness.’ The same fragrance for which the police were emasculated by our valiant Chatra Union protestors when they came with bangles and sarees to Shahbagh thana. What point, then, was Chatra League making in Jagannath? What point were they making in hundreds of cases of assault that they have been implicated in over the years?  Which Islamic force incited them, were they trying to suppress our ‘national culture’? What point were they making when their own female members wanted to protest? And were they making similar points when they extorted Jatra’s Anusheh over a concert, and failing to convince her, incited the conservatives of a village in Sundarban to rise against improperly covered women? But the media barely mentioned the connection.  Some media, in fact, were found to be involved in the extortion. And how am I to separate the point they were making from the chatter: our famous actresses and activists vociferously muddling the waters so the dogs of Shahbagh can maintain jurisdiction– the one the police can quite honestly claim was not theirs— forever.

Friends, sisters, aunties, mockingbirds.  The boy who cried wolf will one day face a real wolf. And that day, the wolf won’t spare any of us, not women, not minorities, no one. Just like we didn’t spare them. Though they hid in the jungle, as harmless as Lee’s innocent birds, the day our tigers roamed free, preying without fear, with the help of our mockingbirds. The dogs of Shahbag mark their territory and we circle in their piss. We sing songs of awakening. But no one wakes up in an echo chamber. Like the vuvuezla that deadens ours sense of sound, the sound of a ten year old screaming, being bitten, thrown, the obfuscations of the mockingbirds make obfuscation of the state unnecessary. And the show goes on.

Something for everyone

Jyoti Rahman

Voters of Dhaka and Chittagong are supposed to exercise their democratic right on 28 April.  These elections are hardly going to change the political status quo that is Mrs Wajed’s one-person rule over Bangladesh.  And yet, there is something for everyone in these elections.

In Dhaka North — where yours truly spent a part of his life — there really is a choice.  Towards the end of this post, you will find the preference of this blog.

To begin with an obvious statement — these elections ended BNP’s andolon.  Arguably, BNP was going nowhere in the streets.  A post-mortem really deserves its own post (and I hesitate to even signal one might be in the offing).  For now, there is no argument that this round went to the League.

Okay, so here is a contentious point — with these elections, the Prime Minister has given Mrs Zia an exit.

Pause, and think about this.

There is no denying that she can be brutally ruthless when she chooses to, and there must have been huge temptation to go for the opposition’s jugular.  So, why did the PM hold back?

I’d argue that by holding back, and allowing her much weakened opponent a way out, the PM strengthens her hold over the establishment — the business sector, the civil-military bureaucracy, and foreign powers.  Remember, the Awami-establishment bargain is based on stability.  Mrs Wajed’s best and only real selling point is that she alone can provide stability.  For a few weeks in January, that proposition was tested.  Driving BNP underground isn’t going to do anything for stability.  Allowing BNP a breathing space through local government election, on the other hand, does help with stabilisation.

Now, make no mistake that BNP is much weakened.  Scores of its grass root activists (and indeed mid-level leadership) have been abducted or killed, and much of its senior leadership is in either jail or exile.  Also, make no mistake that the elections are on a level playing field.  But for BNP, it’s hard to see an alternative to taking the exit offered.  It gives the party a chance to live for another day — there is nothing else.  And even if it doesn’t fight another day, life is something.

I have no idea which way the voters will choose.  It’s entirely possible that BNP will lose all three, fairly or otherwise.  It’s hard to see what the ruling regime can achieve by blatant poll-day rigging (as opposed to pre-poll machinations).  Plus, I am not sure BNP actually has enough strength to get-out-the-vote or maintain adequate presence in the centres on the day.  That is, it is quite possible that BNP will lose a seemingly peaceful semi-decent election.  Should that happen, its rank-and-file will be further demoralised, limiting the chance of another winter flair-up.

But it is also entirely possible that BNP might win all three, or two, or one.

The thing is, even if BNP wins all three, and gets a morale boost, there might still be a lot for the regime.  If BNP were to win on the 28th, on the morning of the 29th, the Prime Minister will claim ‘see, fair election possible under us’, invite the mayors-elect to Ganabhaban and promise full co-operation.  The editorials on the 30th will then be full of praise for Mrs Wajed’s statesmanship, and BNP’s pettiness and idiocy.

Of course, as things stand, the mayors and their councils have no power over anything substantial.  In fact, by allowing these local government elections, the PM is following in the footsteps of the military regimes of HM Ershad or Ayub Khan, or the Raj going back a century — they too allowed elections of local bodies with limited powers to pacify restive subjects.  As such, it’s easy to think about sitting out these elections.

Such cynicism would be wrong.

For one thing, just as was the case under the Raj or the generals, these elections provide an avenue for new politicians to emerge.  Indeed, anyone who claims to be tired of the two netris or politics-as-usual must take these elections seriously.  If not through elections, how else do they propose new leadership will emerge?

Dhaka North is particularly important.  A directly elected mayor of the richest and most educated part of the country — one can think of far worse ways of nurturing new leadership.  The mayor-elect of Dhaka North might have little power on paper.  But he will have tremendous symbolic and moral authority, which may well provide seed capital for a bright political future.

Further, there really is a choice in Dhaka North.  Annisul Huq, Zonayed Saki, Mahi B Chowdhury, Tabith Awal — each of them offer different things, and you should think carefully before exercising your right (if you can) on the 28th.

Take Annisul Huq, the Prime Minister’s choice.  If you believe the PM is doing a helluva job, then clearly you should vote for Mr Huq.  And by the same token, a vote for Mr Huq would mean this is what you really think.

If you fancy yourself as one of the left, if you like railing against ‘neoliberalism’, if you went to Shahbag and then soured on Awami League, then Mr Saki is your man.  Now, my politics is decidedly not of the left.  I think Marx was right about many things but was wrong about the most important matters, and I have a very dim view of non-Marxist populism.  But this post is not a critique of the left.  Relevant thing for us is that by joining the hustings, Mr Saki is signalling that he takes the hard work of politics seriously.  That is to be commended.  If you are serious about the left, then you should vote for him, not Mr Huq.

I am not really sure I see anything commendable in Mr Chowdhury.  I understand he is media-savvy.  He portrays himself as a face of the youth.  I guess in Bangladesh a 46 year old can pass for young.  But Mr Chowdhury is not a new face.  He has been in politics for a decade and half.  He has had plenty of chance to show his acumen.  And he has delivered nought.  Nought is also what he has achieved outside politics.  A vote for him is a lazy choice, a thoughtless choice, symbolising nothing but the voter’s unwillingness to take things seriously.  As it happens, I doubt Mr Chowdhury will get far.  And just as well, for a good showing by Mr Chowdhury would mean worse for future for our politics than a resounding win for Mr Huq.

And that leaves us with Mr Awal.  At 36, he would be considered young for politics anywhere in the world.  He is a genuinely new face in politics.  The politically apathetic might dismiss him as being a parachuted candidate with a silver spoon.  Dismissing Tabith Awal out of such cynicism, however, would be a bad mistake.  Mr Awal is no more a parachuted candidate than Mr Huq.  He is far less a dynastic scion than Mr Chowdhury.  And at least by one measure, he has shown greater commitment to people’s rights than Mr Saki — in late 2013, when the most fundamental of democratic rights, the right to choose one’s government, was being snatched, Mr Awal courted arrest.  Indeed, by that measure, Tabith Awal has shown greater political courage than any of his opponents.

There is a lot of things wrong with BNP.  But endorsing Mr Awal’s candidacy is not one of them.  If you take your rights seriously, if you want the 6% growth and associated social development to continue, if you want to heal the fissure of Shahbag and Shapla Chattar, you must welcome men and women like Mr Awal into politics.

Tabith Awal may be the youngest candidate in Dhaka North, but a vote for him is the mature thing to do.

First Published at https://jrahman.wordpress.com/2015/04/25/something-for-everyone/#more-4090

Real Face of Danger: Harassing University Teacher in Bangladesh

By: Elora Zaman

Bangladesh, a tiny country, is going through a lot these days; so many things are happening there everyday that one can easily loose tracks. However, a particular event needs attention in my opinion. Harassing and beating a university teacher is not an insignificant thing, especially when it takes place in the context of current emotion-based political issues. Such a phenomenon would drive us to the dark age of ignorance and injustice. Such a task, if it will be left unattended and untreated, would only make a rotten society of us.

Ahmad Safa, a renowned Bangladeshi intellectual, once said, the nation is halted for one year if the university is closed for one day. Teachers are the architects of the society. So the question is, why they are prohibited from thinking freely, and expressing their opinion honestly and openly in current Bangladesh in the hands of the so-called freethinkers and liberals?

Good governance is strongly associated with good and proper education. Good educators are essential in the society for manufacturing good citizens and honest human beings, who will be capable of establishing and maintaining good governance. In our society, these educators are being harassed and beaten by political thugs, and those thugs get their shelter from the government. This is a greatest irony.

Last week, some students beat Jahangir Alam, a professor of the Civil Engineering Department in Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology, BUET, in the campus, even inside a classroom. They were not content by verbally and virtually abusing him, they started beating him on the following day of his alleged crime. His crime was to express his opinion in a facebook group regarding the ongoing Tribunal of Crime against Humanity in Bangladesh, especially one of its verdicts that hanged a political leader on that night.

The students in our society are known for respecting their teachers, traditionally, and treating them with more honour than their own parents. This respect is considered as one of the major elements in our socio-psychological construct. Unlike Western culture, our eastern culture conventionally sees that the teachers have rights even to beat their pupils occasionally in order to teach them. That’s why it is extra-ordinarily shocking to see that one of those respected teachers are now being verbally and physically abused by the hand of their own students. Which is more shocking is to see that thousands of teachers in Bangladesh are silent today; they don’t protest and seek justice in this regard. All these are taking place only with the support of current oppressive regime of Awami League, led by the hardliner Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina. Now it has become a commonplace to see that our teachers are forced to act like obedient pets in front of the political leaders.

We can see that many oppressive rulers and monarchs treated the teachers with honour. Many kings are ill-reputed in the history for their deeds, but even they were usually respectful towards the teachers and the scholars. What is happening in current Bangladesh in the name of 1971 war-industry doesn’t know any bound in this regard. Now, every conscious soul is mistreated if they dare to express their opinion freely. Naturally, the educators have become a primary victim in that closed and fascist structure. Do those political thugs and leaders know the place of the educator class in a human society? Or they forget everything due to their physical power and dare to destroy the power of intellectual beings? I urge to everyone concerned about Bangladesh to be aware of the significance of this event and to protest against this with all means possible.

Against the Polite Islamophobia of the Bengali ‘Bhadralok’ : The Bangladesh Unreader

9

The article explores perhaps the most powerful and distracting misreading of desh today, the Islamic vs Secular smokescreen. Its origins are traced through the ‘colon’ narrative which paints the majority of it’s inhabitants as an inferior other, to Aryanisation, an attitude supported by another rotten European theory – racial anthropology. Connecting with manifestations of colonial continuity in the Algerian, Muslim experience of France and the doubling up of Aryanisation on the Muslims of Bengal, the debilitating terrorism rents and settlements of the new jomidary are presented along with sacred, indigenous histories of resistance from which we might draw strength, hope and mobilisation.

Allahumma Salli Ala Muhammadi Nabiyil Ummi – O Allah! Send Prayers upon Muhammad, the Unlettered (Ummi) Prophet

 

Once upon a time in New York, Paris and Dhaka…

” (Islamophobia in) France is the worst in Europe and tries to mask it by proclaiming its secular values (sound familiar?), but these values don’t apply to Islam. In fact, French secularism means anything but Islam” Tariq Ali

In a New York meeting during September 2014, Abdul Latif Siddiqui, the then Bangladesh cabinet minister for Post and Communications (formerly for Jute and Textiles) made a statement denigrating the Hajj pilgrimage, crudely commodifying all of its pilgrims and racially slurring Arabs as the descendants of robbers. The minister was a senior member of the ruling Awami League, returned to government earlier in the year in perhaps South Asia’s most dubious general elections ever. There was widespread revulsion as to how a senior politician of a country of over 100 million Muslims could make such statements in public, and after protests he was eventually sacked.

Unlike many, I was not shocked by the contempt shown to the indigenous Muslim culture of Bangladesh by members of the elite who rule in their name. I came across many such instances in recent years whilst researching and discussing the suppression of urban industrial workers in 2012 and the massacre of protesters mainly from rural madrassas in May 2013.

In an academic forum, I witnessed the spectacle of seeing a Bangladeshi academic describing the massacre victims of May 2013 (over 60 unarmed protesters killed) as feral animals that needed to be culled, and another academic justifying the massacre on the basis that the protestors were causing unnecessary traffic congestion in Dhaka.   Bangladesh is not exceptional in having to suffer such Macaulayan Misleadership, that is to say firmly in the thrall of white supremacy and its epistemicidal traditions. To the bemusement of many observers, outrageous colonial continuities are explicitly written into much of Francophone Africa’s independence documentation.

Recognition of the globality and gravity of this condition is the first step to unreading Bangladesh. The next step being, unwinding the roots and after effects of the racial supremacy woven into the fabric of Bengali nationalist selfhood, eventually creating new spaces for indigenous discourse to be heard.

We saw another manifestation of this contempt for the local and thrall for the colonial as a large section of elite in the social media in Bangladesh gave unequivocal support (#jesuischarlie) to the French magazine, Charlie Hebdo, following the massacre there, whilst maintaining their silence on Bangladesh governments systematic destruction of press freedom.  In their submission, they conveniently ignored the fact that the magazine disproportionately targeted the marginalised Muslim minority of France, viewing them as a ‘Clandestino’ fifth column. Commentators such as Richard Seymour and Professor Tariq Ramadan, rightly called out the publication as racist, while a former writer for the publication, Olivier Cyran, had previously pointed out that,

“Belief in one’s own superiority, accustomed to looking down on the common herd, is the surest way to sabotage one’s own intellectual defences and to allow them to fall over in the least gust of wind.”

In fact, to the observant eye, this contempt can be seen running through the corporate media of Bangladesh as well as the  elite, in their political pronouncements, reporting and academic masquerades. Here, the urban and rural poor and their mainly Muslim culture, is infantalised, primitivised and decivilised into an essentialised mindless mob. To rephrase Fanon, talking down to the mainly Muslim poor in Bangladesh, as well as ‘Islamophobic’ insults make the Muslim, “the eternal victim of an essence, of an appearance for which he is not responsible”. Thus the precursor to any oppression, exploitation and elimination is the process of differentiation and dehumanisation.

Take Tasneem Khalil’s recent op ed in the Dhaka Tribune, which blames Muslims worldwide for being somehow responsible for the January 7 attack in Paris. The newspaper cites attitudes of Egyptian Muslims in a poll, but omits that most of the respondents in the poll live in one of the most economically unequal and repressive countries in the world, as if to ask someone whose house is on fire, why he is so agitated? The article also misreads the opinion polls of respondents in Muslim countries, ignoring nuances, hence mimicking the method ,attitudes and conclusion of Islamophobes in the West, such as Bill Maher and Sam Harris.

If we skip back a few years, we can recall when the editor of the same ‘liberal’ newspaper, Zafar Sohban (then as assistant editor in the Daily Star) wrote/incited in a polite tone, for the elimination of Bangladesh’s  ‘Original Sin’ of Muslim identity based politics. Arguing for the restoration of ‘Mission 1971’ by the cleansing of poison from the bloodstream and righting history. In doing so he (un)intentionally resonates the mood music, intellectual cover and political anesthetic for the new ‘Guerra Sucia’ (Dirty War) afoot in Bangladesh. A Dirty War in which so many opposition political activists have been abducted, disappeared and murdered. Leaving in the wake orphans, widows and terrified communities throughout Bangladesh.

In the midst of the obligatory, hypocritical media cacophony, author Will Self made an insightful intervention on the justice of journalism, that it should afflict the comfortable and comfort the afflicted. In the elite  blogosphere and corporate press of Bangladesh, with its latent Islamophobia, such ‘crusading churnalism’ as in the case of the Dhaka Tribune, does the inverse, comforting the comfortable and afflicting the afflicted, thus reinforcing the hierarchy and power left over by former colonial masters, and kept intact by their successors.

Beyond the Fog of (the Phony) War: Decoding the riddle of Bangladesh

Give every man thy ear, but few thy voice.

Hamlet – William Shakespeare

Polite Islamophobia in Bangladesh is defended and justified by the myth of a ‘No Stopping the Cavalry – Long War’ of Bengali exceptionalism. This is an imaginary, intergenerational and Manichean struggle between the forces of a muscular ethnic and linguistic nationalism, wrapped in eurocentric values pitted against the global forces medieval Islamism. These goggles view the, ‘Cops of the World’ War on Terror as a boon for sapping the strength of this global Islamism, eventually leading to its elimination.

Grounding ourselves in current and historical data, we view this imaginary war as a smokescreen for a struggle between a privileged elite and an ever emboldening population, a distraction from the struggle for more visible participation in the state and society at large by a hitherto marginalised majority. The languages and symbolisms used in the struggle reflect the traditions inherited, internalised and embodied by its participants., the elite from their European colonial masters, the masses from their indigenous tradition, Islam, and everywhere inbetween. Globalisation, coupled with the War on Terror, has (re)turned the balance towards the masses, leading to the somewhat painful (re)emergence of Muslim nationalistic discourse and identity of the state, in Bangladesh.

Seeing past the smokescreen requires that we excavate behind the fairytale. We have to go beyond that the sitting regime came to power on the coat tails of a ‘development partner’  imposed military coup, and has manifested the fascistic one party state ideology that only it can yield. We must travel and dwell in the roots of the present ex-colonial state, if not further, with a wide angled lens and a longer duration, to comprehend the reality and after effects of the colonial encounter.  

Colonosibilite’ and the new ‘colons’

Sixty years ago in French occupied North Africa, familiar tensions existed between a foreign imposed ‘colon’ government and the mainly Muslim populace. Here, racist and Islamophobic prejudice combined with economic domination created an entrenched two-tier society, sitting on a tinderbox.

It was into this milieu that the Algerian Muslim writer and intellectual Malik Bennabi published his ‘Vacation de Islam’ (Vocation of Islam) in 1954, to synchronise with the outbreak of the Algerian War of Independence against the French. During this 8 year long war, 400 000 to 1 500 000 people are thought to have died, out of a population of 10 million, it was one of the defining anti-colonial struggles of the 20th century.

In the Vocation, Malik Bennabi presents the concept of colonsibilite’, the process through which elites in Algeria and other Muslim countries had declined culturally and intellectually to a stage where colonialism was inevitable. Bennabi distinguishes between a country simply conquered and occupied, and a colonised country. The latter having lost its own cultural bearings, internalising what we might call a ‘House Muslim’ mentality upon the perceived superiority of the colonial masters.

Unlike French colonialism in North Africa which was more direct, British imperial rule in Bengal was more indirect, tending to rule in partnership with local intermediaries, who in turn helped them exploit the local populace and ecology. In a familiar image and model to that painted by Bennabi and Fanon, but upon a different precolonial civilisational milieu, we have in the alienated culture of Bangladesh’s mental elite. Its ‘cultural’ heyday, of British Raj Calcutta, are situated upon the devastation of 1770 Bengal Famine, the land grab of the 1793 Permanent Settlement, and the production of a select and moneyed class, pliant and beholden to the British.

Flogging the dead horses of the Aryanisation Apocalypse: The Common Roots of Islamophobia

Liberte’, Egalite, Ambiguite

During the 19th Century, the multiculture of Bengal was subjected to Double Aryanisation from the blackboards of British administrators and their local rentier-landlord development partners. This mirrored the Aryanisation of Classical Civilisation in Europe at the time, and the expulsion of references to African and Asiatic influences on the Ancient Greeks, as demonstrated by Martin Bernal in his Black Athena series. Bernal shows that during the 19th century there was whitewashing of the origins of Western Civilization, a process which he termed Aryanisation.

Aryanisation is a product of an imagined Aryan identity formulated by the 18th century French Orientalist, Abraham-Hyacinthe Anquetil Duperron. In the 19th century the concept was developed further by the French Arthur de Gobineu into a hierarchy of races. In this hierarchy of scientific racism, ‘superior’ races like the Aryans are juxtaposed against inferior races, such as Semites (Arabs and Jews) and ‘Negroes’. It judges that inferior races have an incapacity to grasp metaphysics, philosophy or the arts.

Aryanisation was forged in a bigoted Europe, where in the zeitgeist of  Imperialism, nations and national cultures were given shape and supportive national myths. These artificial constructs provided soothing balms to conscience of the coloniser and his local side kick, justifying on a rational basis, through a racial anthropology, the economic and political exploitation of indigenous masses in an increasingly globalised capitalist system.

In colonial Bengal, Double Aryanisation was achieved through ideological linguistics and an elite schooling system that remains in service today, these are now busy reproducing inequalities despite two attempts at national self determination.  The eviction of references to Muslim (Persian and Arabic) influence on ‘pure’, ‘chaste’ Bengali language has been demonstrated by Anandita Ghosh’s recent work on the artificial construction of the Bengali language in the 19th century, functionally it delegitimises indigenous expressions and discomforts the subaltern.  As elsewhere in South Asia, this schooling of elites would create, what Professor Akbar Ahmed dubs, MacCaulay’s Chickens, a class of natives, Indian in appearance but Anglicised in term of education, taste and cultural norms. But in Bangladesh, ‘the Animals at the farm, in the form of chickens have been forcefully inbred by their farmers, to form a hybrid breed, twice removed from the original colonial encounter, and twice alienated from their natural environment.

Zooming out to other human experiences, the after effects of similar (but one-stage), ‘Road to Nowhere’ Aryanising projects unfolded in Iran through the writings of Mirza Agha Khan Kermani, put into practice by the Pahlavi dynasty. In Turkey initialising through the works of Ziya Gokalp, it reaching its zenith with the reforms of Mustafa Kamal.

The alienating and socially debilitating effects of the of this Aryanisation in Bengal during the British Raj was noted in the 20th century, by the historian Arnold J Toynbee in his A Study of History. He wrote of the anguish of British administrators, writing about the phenomena of Calcutta, creating an intellectually bankrupt class of rentier political activists and ideologues.

This sentiment was echoed nearly a hundred years on in independent Bangladesh, by the novelist Zia Rahman Haider. There in front of the ‘Bricks in the Wall’, on the hallowed grounds of ‘Oxford of the East’ Dhaka University, he declared, ‘Bangladesh as a land of dead ideas, where new concepts are throttled at birth and never get passed on because of social, political and class barriers.’

A good example of this double battery hen’s Aryanised epistemology at work in Bangladesh, is in the production of a mainly ‘Dark Side of the Moon’ academic attitude in Bangladesh. One facet of this psychological suffocating (‘Breathe’) malaise afflicting large sections of the intelligentsia can be seen in the Islamophobic discrimination against madrasah students in higher education. For example Dhaka and Jahangirnagar University’s have barred the admission of government run (Aliya) madrasa graduates into Arts and Science departments. This imposed barrier to learning and flourishing has nothing to do with merit,  Aliya graduates have occupied the top 20 positions in the admission test in Jahangirnagar University. The matter was taken up in the High Court and Supreme Court which lifted the bar but many universities are unwilling to admit madrasa graduates in many departments regardless. That the ‘Brain Damage’ university leaderships saw fit to segregate ‘Us and Them’  the different learning traditions of the society speaks volumes as to their intellectual insecurity, if not their fundamental institutional failure.

Frances Harrison in a presentation in London shed some light on this attitude. She explained that some university teachers in Bangladesh complained to her about their fear of being ‘Eclipsed’ by madrasah students in the class room. They explained that madrasah students knew more about religion than the actual teachers, and often corrected them, thus undermining their authority in front of other students.

War on Terror Times: The new Zamindery and its Terrorism Rent

If patriotism was the last refuge of the scoundrel in the 18th century, it has been replaced by the War on Terror in this one. The refuge, allows the continued oiling of ‘The Welcome to the Machine’ post independence status quo,  allowing a ‘colon elite’, to carry on their brutal and wasteful and dangerous reign over a population which does not share their values.

Recognition and analysis of this enterprise is broadening, with the idea of ‘Terrorism Rent’ describing how regimes frame their domestic political opposition as a security issue with the prism of the ‘War on Terror’. In this Faustian pact, international interests/donors turn a blind eye to internal suppression, while providing foreign aid, valued by many. to prop up corrupt regimes and their dependants. In return the host countries, allow Western interests to gain strategic influence and footholds, under the guise of military assistance and countering Chinese encroachment in the Third World. In this sense, the ‘War on Terror’ functions as an ideological narrative that underpins the capacity of Western and American states to sustain control over an increasingly fragile and changing international system. For example in Afghanistan  we have a Norwegian government report revealing how covert indirect US support to both to the Taliban in Afghanistan and overt support to the Afghan authorities, is used to ‘calibrate the level of violence’, thus sustaining support for US military intervention and presence in the region.

In sub saharan Africa we see a return of the French. In Bangladesh, there has been an increase in military assistance by the UK, focusing on counter insurgency under the comical doublespeak of ‘Democracy Stabilisation’.  A British ‘Democracy Stabilization’ experience gained in the decade long occupation of the Helmand Province of Afghanistan, where in 13 years British troops were responsible for the deaths of over 500 Afghan civilians and the injuries of thousands and yet did not capture or kill a single Al Qaida operative.

The unintended consequences of the ongoing ‘War on Terror’, and the accompanying intensification of Islamophobia that comes with it, is the counter intuitive awakening of an assertive Muslim identity and consciousness and what one would term the rise of Muslim nationalism. As in the face of such hostility and prejudice, even the most secular Muslim, as happened in Northern Ireland amongst Irish Catholics, is forced to defend Islam and the rights of a Muslim identity.

In Bangladesh, this is seen in the enduring support the massacred rural Madrassah students and their affiliates still receive in all sections of society, including ever growing numbers of the governing and commercial elite. Farhad Mazhar in London termed the massacre as a victory for the rural madrassah students, in terms of putting a halt to the de-Islamification and Aryanisation policies of the current Awami League government and being a catalyst for a re emerging of a mainstream Muslim political discourse and identity in Bangladesh. Six decades ago Fanon identified the same phenomenon amongst the native Algerians, vis a vis their French colon rulers.  In Fanon’s essay, Algeria Unveiled, the French attempt to unveil the Algerian women did not simply turn the veil into symbol of resistance, it become a technique to camouflage, a means of struggle. Thus every veiled women became a suspect and also at the same time a  sign of resistance.

To conclude, the reassertion of Muslim political discourse in Bangladesh, is not as what many colon elite academics home and abroad would market as the thin end of an edge of a rising global Islamic militancy. As elsewhere, it is profoundly connected to long term local experiences and demands on post colonial state institutions, to dignify and include the identity of those who they claim to represent. This concern is expressed in an indigenous tradition and language of the people, which in the case of Bangladesh, is Islam.

Emperors and Dervishes – The Mantle of the Prophet and a Tradition of Resisting Empire

If a wound touches you, a like wound already has touched the opposing ones; such days We deal out in turn among men, and that God may know who are the people of faith, and that He may take witnesses from among you; and God loves not the evildoers. (3:140)

Quran -verses referring to the Battle of Uhd

Countering external and internal Aryanising aggression, is the tradition of resisting Empire in Bangladesh, a Quranic semantic field of meaning consciously and subliminally deep rooted in the collective psyche. I was fortunate to be acquainted with an example of this living tradition, when I met  the Principal of a Qawmi Madrasah in Sylhet who was a scholar of prophetic traditions. A contemporary of Allama Shafi, the leader of Hefazot e Islam, the shaykh had the triple distinction of  being imprisoned and tortured by the British, arrested and imprisoned under the Pakistani generals of United Pakistan, and being physically assaulted and imprisoned in his last years by the first Awami League government of 1996 -2000. Everytime he was imprisoned he had with him the khirqa, shawl given to him by his teacher, who was imprisoned and tortured by the British, who in turn received the shawl from his teacher who was also imprisoned and tortured by the British, who in turn received a shawl from his teachers of the Madrasah Rahimiyyah in Delhi, and who were at the forefront at the 1857 War of Liberation against the British invaders. A tradition of the khirqa and seeking justice going back through the ages to the earliest Muslim community, to Imam Hussain in Karbala,  Abdullah ibn Zubair in Makkah and the Prophet Muhammad’s struggle against the Quraysh.

‘The greatest Jihad is to speak the truth in the face of an unjust tyrant.’

The Prophet Muhammad (pbuh)

We see the same non violent resistance in Turkey against the state in the life and struggles of the Naqshbandi Sufi and Kurd, Said Nursi. Who for his criticism of Mustafa Kemal, was imprisoned, starved and poisoned by the Turkish state. Yet the Turkey of today, with the reintroduction of the Ottoman Arabic script in the High Schools, is not the Turkey of Mustafa Kemal and the Kemalist generals but the Turkey of Said Nursi. The current political establishment of the late Menderes and Ozal,and the presently feuding Gulen and Erdogan were influenced by Said Nursi’s movement and teachings.

Straight after the Dhaka centred massacre of the 5/6th of May 2013, fully armed members of the Bangladeshi  security forces attempted to storm the Hathazari Madrassah near Chittagong, but were beaten back by local residents and students of the madrassah. Soon afterwards, I interviewed a graduate of Hathazari to gather more information. I asked him his thoughts post massacre, especially with Allama Shafi, the movement leader in police custody. He gave me a somewhat cryptic reply by narrating the story of the Indian Saint, Imam Rabbani –  Sheikh Ahmed Sirhindi.

The Naqshbandi Sirhindi was galvanised into a course diametrically opposed to the Mughal state when his father in law was executed by the then Emperor Akbar, for sacrificing a cow at Eid ul Adha. Sirhindi was eventually imprisoned by Akbar’s son Jahangir, arrested on the grounds of failing to bow to the Emperor.  After the arrest, rebellion broke out in the Empire in protest. The rebels eventually captured the Emperor and asked Sirhindi for advice. Contrary to expectations he ordered the rebels to release Jahangir.

Impressed with the Sufi Sheikh, the alcoholic Jahangir kept him imprisoned but not before elevating him to the role of advisor, eventually releasing him. The Emperor outlived this Dervish, as Sirhindi died a few years after his release, however, his own grandson Aurangzeb would be initiated into the Naqshbandi tariqah by Sirhindi’s son. Aurungzeb would go onto commission the codification of Islamic Law, the Fatwa Alamghiri and patronise the institution that co produced it, the Madrasah Rahmiyyah.

‘Gimme Shelter’ for ‘A Change is Gonna Come’

Aside from the enduring indigenous traditions and the impact on the War on Terror. Geo-economic shifts place Bangladesh into an interesting situation . With the centre of global economic and cultural activity returning from the mid Atlantic to the Indian Ocean, we are reminded of half a millenium ago, when Mughal India and Imperial China accounted for nearly two thirds of world manufacturing.

Such a change in resource and human flows opens up possibilities and multiple trajectories, of ‘Learning to Fly’ and take off, from one party rule in China, the managed democracy of Singapore and the petro-autocracies of the Gulf, to the more accommodating polities of West Asia and the populist democracies and liberation theologies of Latin America. Greater exposure to possible political futures is yeast for the imagination, of how we might be more reflective and inclusive of our traditions, values and historical experiences.

Surveying the present political field of Bangladesh, the ‘East Wind’ that is currently blowing through Bangladesh, does not originate from the current autocratic Awami League (AL) government, but goes back further, and is more systemic. from the silent, clenched buttocks of a ‘Bhadralok’ class.  An unwieldy coalition of military and civilian bureaucrats, civil society leaders and businessmen, who are now currently keeping the AL in power. Who by their desperation of holding on to colonial privileges, are creating a vacuum, by dismantling the very state that has been set up to protect them.

Faced with shifting global power geometries and historical patterns, the Double Aryanised elites of Bangladesh might perceive two stark choices before them. Either they equitably share power and resources with the indigenous mainly Muslim population, reflect their values in state institutions and respect their dignity, as what happened in Turkey, or they be dragged kicking and screaming to the firing squads as in Iran, during the revolution of 1979.

One option they do not have is the ‘Comfortably Numb’ King Canute fantasy of hoping to drive back the winds of change and sands of history that are enveloping them and their exclusive ethnic Bengali exceptionalism, proclaiming:

‘My name is Ozymandias, king of kings:

Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!’

A fitting reply being:

Nothing beside remains. Round the decay

Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare

The lone and level sands stretch far away

Or as Led Zeppelin would say:

‘Your Time Is Gonna Come’.

 

Accompanying Videography with the Article

 

  1. Why Is Charlie Hebdo OK, But Not Dieudonne? (Al Etejah TV 2015)
  2. The Battle of Algiers (1966)
  3. Hur Adam (2011) – Biopic of Said Nursi

 

Accompanying Discography with Article:

  1. ‘Clandestino’ – Manu Chao
  2. “Stop the Cavalry” – Jona Lewie
  3. “Cops of the World” – Phil Ochs
  4. “Animals” – Pink Floyd
  5. “Road to Nowhere” – Talking Heads
  6. “Brick in the Wall” – Pink Floyd
  7. “The Dark side of the Moon” – Pink Floyd
  8. “Welcome to the Machine” – Pink Floyd
  9. ‘’Gimme Shelter’’ – Rolling Stones
  10. “ A Change is Gonna Come” – Sam Cooke
  11. “Learning to Fly” – Pink Floyd
  12. “Comfortably Numb” – Pink Floyd
  13. “Your Time is Gonna Come” – Led Zeppelin

A Lear’s Fool to King Tarique

There is no shortage of punditry along the line of BNP-is-in-trouble, most being pretty vacuous like this.  Shuvo Kibria had a better attempt a few weeks ago:

সরকার ….. নিজের আস্থাহীনতার সঙ্কট আছে।….. জনব্যালটে তার ভরসা নেই। …..সরকার চাইবে রাজনৈতিক শক্তি হিসেবে বিএনপিকে সমূলে উৎপাটিত করতে। বিএনপির চ্যালেঞ্জ হচ্ছে, রাজনৈতিক শক্তি হিসেবে নিজেকে পুনঃপ্রতিষ্ঠা করা।  (The government has its own crisis of confidence…. It doesn’t rely on public ballot…. The governent will want to uproot BNP as a political force.  BNP’s challenge is to re-establish itself as a political force).

I think the above is in on the whole correct.  And there may be a degree of validity in this as well:

বিএনপির প্রথম সারির নেতাকর্মীদের মাঠে নেমে প্রমাণ করতে হবে দলের স্বার্থে তারা যেকোনো ঝুঁকি নিতে প্রস্তুত।  (BNP’s front row leaders and workers will need to prove their willingness to take any risk for the party by getting into the field).

But I think even Kibria misses some key nuances.

Let’s start with a few observations.

First, on BNP’s failure in the streets.  By all accounts, BNP rank-and-file gave it a pretty good shot this time last year.  And they came short.  They could not stop the government from ramming through a one-sided election as a result of which Hasina Wajed continues to be the prime minister.  But BNP’s failure is not qualitatively different from MK Gandhi’s in the early 1920s, or Sheikh Mujibur Rahman’s in the mid-1960s.  Our history is full of failed street movements.  The historical reality is, most andolons fail, just like BNP’s did.

The past is not always an accurate guide to the future.  But I am quite skeptical of any analysis that concludes with ‘BNP must launch a vigorous andolon that will lead to a mass upsurge’.  Even if BNP could mount one, in and of itself, what would another round of street protests, blockades and hartals achieve?

Second, BNP failed to win over the bastions of power that ultimately matter Bangladesh.  Above everything else, powers-that-be want a stable Bangladesh.  And BNP failed to convince the civil-military bureaucracy, corporate sector and foreign stakeholders that it could provide stability.  Of course, in a two-horse race, one doesn’t have to be particularly good — simply being just not as bad as the other side makes one win such races.  It’s not that everyone is inspired by the Prime Minister.  It’s just that when all is said and done, sufficiently large number of key stakeholders simply didn’t respond to BNP, and accepted Mrs Wajed.

Third, from BNP leadership’s actions, we can deduce something about its self-assessment.  Recall, we can summarise BNP’s travails as one of either marketing or management or product.  By making it abundantly clear that Tarique Rahman is the party’s future, BNP is signalling that it believes the problem is not management.  Therefore, it must believe the focus should either be marketing or product or a combination.

As would be clear by the end of the piece, I do not necessarily agree with BNP’s choice (and that’s putting it mildly).  But it matters little what I think.  Leaving my views aside, let’s accept for now that BNP has got it right — Mr Rahman is the best it has got.  Fine.  So, how should he try to win over the powers-that-be?

If we assume that BNP’s middle-of-the-road, don’t-rock-the-boat pragmatic Burkean conservatism is the appropriate ‘product’ for Bangladesh — full disclosure: I personally do — then the challenge before Mr Rahman is simple: he needs to establish himself as acceptable to the establishment.  Currently, he patently is not.  Believing that the establishment will choose him over the Prime Minister is like claiming the earth is flat.  Railing against the establishment for its alleged hypocrisy on this count is futile.  Bottomline: senior state functionaries, big shot businessmen, and interested foreigners don’t think much of Mr Rahman.

They didn’t think much of him last winter.  And since then, sporadic forays in our pathetic history wars have done nothing to improve his standing.  They create media buzz, senior Awami League leaders end up looking quite stupid, and BNP rank-and-file feel fired up for a while.  But what do they do to alleviate Mr Rahman’s extremely negative image?

To ask is to answer.

Right.  So, what should Tarique Rahman do?

In the first instance, he should stop appearing in silly videos with stupid titles like Deshnayak, or never, ever, indulge in the circus of cutting supersized birthday cakes.  As it happens, it is quite rational for even a sensible and erudite person like Mirza Fakhrul Islam Alamgir to engage in these acts.  After all, in a party that is by design bereft of any strong ideological mooring but the politics of synthesis of centrist, pragmatic nationalism, if there is no internal organisational rejuvenation, how else are the party workers and leaders to signal their allegiance but to foster a personality cult?  Of course, by doubling down with Mr Rahman, organisation rejuvenation has been made just that much harder.

That is, BNP — or rather, Tarique Rahman — has created a vicious cycle. Its current senior leaders — and note the word senior, these are old men and women — have no alternative to engaging in obscene Tarique-mania, which puts off otherwise sympathetic elements of the establishment, which compounds BNP’s problems, which creates further distrust among its leaders, who must then engage in further sycophancy, and so it goes.

If Tarique Rahman ever wants to govern Bangladesh, he must end this now.  If he doesn’t get the irony of being called a deshnayak while living in bidesh, if he thinks he is the embodiment of youth at 50 — an age by which his father had been president for nearly four years, or Sheikh Mujibur Rahman was already hailed as Bangabandhu — he will never make it.

Dramatically cutting off the circus would be a good first step, and a low hanging fruit.  Mr Rahman will need to follow that up with more speeches and public appearances, and not just to the choir in East London about Sheikh Mujib’s Pakistani passport (do we really need to replace Hasina Wajed with someone who seriously thinks Mujib needed a passport in Heathrow airport in January 1972?).

This is not to say he should shy away from hitting hard on the haloed Mujib myth.   Like it or not, history wars is a key part of our politics that BNP cannot shy away from.  Apparently Tarique paid respect at Mujib’s grave several times when BNP was in power.  Why on earth did they keep that a secret?  Why not talk about it now?  And then, the respect for Mujib-the-nationalist-hero notwithstanding, draw the parallel between 1974-75 and the present day, maybe in a frank series of interviews with Zafar Sobhan — now, wouldn’t that be something?

And yet, that would not be enough.  Even if he is humanised and shown to be a normal, decent person, to the establishment there are grave doubts about his associates.  The establishment wants to feel comfortable that Tarique Rahman’s associates are their own.  On this, Mr Rahman will do well to learn from, wait-for-it, Mrs Wajed.

Yes, believe it or not, once upon a not too distant past, the establishment did not trust the Prime Minister and her party.  Even in the early 1990s, the stereotype was that those few Awami Leaguers qualified enough to govern were unreconstructed socialists, while most AL-ers were simply not fit for office.  This changed in the lead up to 1996 election, when Mrs Wajed made it clear that people like the late SAMS Kibria or AHSK Sadeq were in her inner sanctum.  This paved the way for a rapprochement between the League and the establishment.

Tarique Rahman needs to do something similar for his party.  Appointing a fresh-faced PhD in marketing, I’m afraid, simply doesn’t do that.

Therein lies the rub.  Mr Rahman needs people who are already established in their fields — business, professions, academia, at home and abroad — by his side.  But such people simply don’t like him much.  Why would they put their trust in someone whose only claim to fame is his parents (and infamy from his lifelong friends)?  Dynasty didn’t do it for a dud like Rahul Gandhi.  Why should Tarique be any different?

Mr Rahman has odds stacked against him.  Therefore, it follows that he has to shake things up.

Two acts come to mind, neither easy, and one carry high risks.

Firstly, Tarique Rahman must produce a game-changing idea.  Not nice ideas like how to improve agricultural yield as he did in an early London speech in 2013 — that kind of stuff can go well with his little chinwag with Mr Sobhan.  But that won’t shake things up.  No, he needs to do what Mujib did in 1966 by presenting Six-Points.

Back then, Ayub Khan dominated over Pakistan.  Grand old men like HS Suhrawardy were either dead or marginalised.  Younger, leftist firebrands were beginning to turn on each other, taking their cue from Beijing and Moscow.  Mujib’s peers like Ataur Rahman Khan looked tired with their calls for restoration of democracy.  Ayub could simply ignore them.  But Mujib with his Six-Points was different.  Here was a paradigm shift.  Fiscal autonomy.  Monetary autonomy.  East Pakistan’s own oreign trade missions and paramilitary.  Mujib called for an end to not just Ayub regime, but Pakistan-as-it-existed.  Ayub knew he had to use the ‘language of weapon’.  So he did.  Mujib went to jail, and came out after the regime collapsed.

It’s very important to understand that the 1968-69 uprising that led to Ayub’s fall was not a step-by-step escalation of any andolon programme by Mujib or his party.  An urban uprising started in West Pakistan from a clash between students and army jawans in the beginning of winter 1968, and by the end of the winter, both wings of erstwhile Pakistan was aflame.  At the centre of the uprising was Maolana Bhashani.  But not only was Bhashani without a party, he was also a man without any compelling ideas for the post-Ayub world, and zero support among the establishment.  When the Pakistani establishment had turned on Ayub, the emergent East Bengali establishment squarely stood with Mujib.

That’s the act Tarique has to emulate.  He has to produce a coherent vision that the current Bangladeshi establishment could rally behind when, rather than if, Mrs Wajed’s regime unravels.  And unravel the current regime will, sooner or later — let me quote myself from January:

….. she stands on the precipice of chaos, for the simple reason that Bangladesh — a super-densely populated humid swamp — is always at the edge of chaos.  Usually, mandate from a democratic election, or the prospect of the next one, keeps us from falling over the cliff.  By taking away the option of a democratic election, the Prime Minister has effectively put a ticking time bomb on herself.

Tarique has to make sure that when the time comes, he is not brushed aside like the old Maolana.  And for that, a compelling vision for a post-Hasina Bangladesh — hard as that might be to conjure — is not necessary, but not sufficient for Tarique.  He still needs to demonstrate that he as an individual has what it takes.  He must demonstrate his grit.  His sickly, elderly mother does that every time she goes out to one of those rallies.  Mrs Wajed did that in 2007 when she defied the 1/11 regime and returned home, or in 2004 as the subject of an assassination attempt, or in 1988 when police open fired on her rally.  His father demonstrated grit in the battlefields in 1965 and 1971, and every day between 3 November 1975 and 30 May 1981.  Sheikh Mujibur Rahman demonstrated grit by never compromising with the Pakistanis despite spending much of the 1950s and 1960s in jail.

That’s the standard Tarique Rahman has to live up to.  A London exile simply doesn’t cut it.  He has to return home, embrace a prison sentence, and possible threat to his life.

That’s the bottomline for him.

As things stand, with Tarique Rahman in his current avatar as BNP’s chosen future, I am afraid the future is bleak, and we might soon be discussing BNP’s past.

How to lose the history wars

by Jyoti Rahman

I said in the previous post:

They didn’t think much of him last winter. And since then, sporadic forays in our pathetic history wars have done nothing to improve his standing. They create media buzz, senior Awami League leaders end up looking quite stupid, and BNP rank-and-file feel fired up for a while. But what do they do to alleviate Mr Rahman’s extremely negative image?

Obviously, I don’t approve of the way Tarique Rahman is engaging in the ‘history wars’.  It occurs to me that I should elaborate and clarify.  Hence this post.  I don’t agree with Mr Rahman’s interpretation of history.  More importantly, from a partisan political perspective, I think they cause more harm than good for BNP.  And most frustratingly, a few solid points that BNP could make very usefully are utterly wasted.

Let’s start with the claim made about Sheikh Mujibur Rahman — that he was a Pakistani collaborator who compromised with the Yahya regime because he was after personal power.  I paraphrase, but this is the gist.  And this is about as sensible as the claim that Ziaur Rahman was a Pakistani spy.

Let me refer to GW Chowdhury, Abul Mansur Ahmed, and Moudud Ahmed.  Hardly disciples of the cult of Mujib, any of these men.  And yet, all three write how Mujib might have compromised on the Six Points at any time between the winter of 1968-69 and the summer of 1971, and become Pakistan’s prime minister.  Ayub and Yahya offered him the job in February 1969.  There was a general expectation that the Six Points were Mujib’s ambit claim, and he would compromise after the election.  ZA Bhutto calculated that.  Yahya Khan calculated that.

But Mujib did not.

In fact, by officiating a public ceremony where he led the Awami League legislators-elect to swear an oath on the Quran to never compromise on the Six Points, Mujib left himself little wiggle room to compromise even if he had wanted to.  What Mujib stood for in 1970 elections was abundantly clear, and he did not compromise from that.

Mujib wanted to compromise for personal gain — is Tarique Rahman trying to become the jatiyatabadi Omi Rahman Pial?

Of course, it gets worse.  What does one make of the claim that Mujib traveled on a Pakistani passport in January 1972?  I am sure Shafiq Rehman can conjure a brilliant political satire about the Heathrow immigration officer asking ‘Right, Sheikh eh, since when Pakis had Sheikhs’.  But the joke here is at the expense of anyone who believes Mujib would have needed a passport to pass through Heathrow that January.

And in this comedy, BNP loses a chance to score a sound political point.  No, Mujib wasn’t a Pakistani collaborator.  That’s nonsense.  What’s not nonsense, what’s undeniable, is that he did not prepare for an armed resistance, that he was absent from the war.  Now, it is possible to argue that Mujib did not want to lead a war of national liberation, and he had good reasons for taking the course he did — I have made that argument myself, and I stand by it.

But that’s just my interpretation of events.  And even if I am right, it’s legitimate to say that Mujib got it wrong big time.  Politically, the potent argument here is — the nation trusted Mujib with its future, and Mujib failed the nation in the dark night of 25 March 1971, not because Mujib was a bad guy, not because he was a collaborator, not because he was greedy or coward or anything, but far worse, he made the wrong judgment.

Salahuddin Quader Chowdhury once (in)famously made that point.  Repeatedly made, that would be a killer punch against the haloed Mujib myth.  What Tarique Rahman offers is not worth more than infantile facebook banter.

So, why does he do it?

Perhaps this passage from 2012 would provide some method behind this madness:

A blogger friend sounds a pessimistic note: ‘Our countrymen are maybe more blatant about it than most, but there is no “true” history anywhere in the world. It’s all air-brushed, covered with pancake makeup, and then dipped into rosewater.’ He suggests that these history wars are just a form of dialectic struggle, perhaps a healthy one at that.

That discussion was had at a time when Awami League cabinet ministers all the way to people like Muntassir Mamoon would routinely call Ziaur Rahman a Pakistani spy or sleeper agent.  Here is the full quote:

What will happen when BNP returns to power? Maybe what MM is doing is in anticipation of BNP returning to power. I mean, let’s face it, our countrymen are maybe more blatant about it than most, butthere is notruehistory anywhere in the world. It’s all airbrushed, covered with pancake makeup, andthen dipped into rosewater. Think of these “history wars” as a dialectic struggle, and whatever emerges out of this is what Bangladeshi children, fifty years on, will learn. And they won’t be any worse off for it.

Additionally, remember, when BNP comes to power, where MM leaves off is where BNP has to start. So the more AL-oriented the history is, the more effort BNP will have to put in to revert just back to the mid-point state, let alone make it pro-BNP.

So, calling Mujib a collaborator is perhaps the dialectic tat for the tit of Zia being a Pakistani spy.

Maybe.  And maybe in the long run this will all be washed out.  But right now, this isn’t doing Tarique Rahman any good.  Maybe if BNP ever came to power, it could start its version of history.  But right now, Tarique should remember what happened to Hasina Wajed in February 1991.

In the lead up to the parliamentary election of that month — the first one held after the fall of the Ershad regime — Mrs Wajed repeatedly launched personal attack on Zia, calling him a murderer and drunkard, including in her nationally televised (this was when there was nothing but the BTV) campaign speech.  Mr Rahman is old enough to remember how aghast the chattering classes were at Mrs Wajed.  This was a time when Zia was fondly remembered by our establishment.

Over the past quarter century, Zia’s image has faded, and Mujib’s has been given a new gloss.  Right now, the establishment reaction to Tarique is similar to the visceral reaction the Awami chief caused in 1991.

Mr Rahman seems to be learning the wrong lesson from Mrs Wajed.

So, what do I suggest?

Let me answer that with reference to why and how I believe BNP must engage in history wars:

BNP needs to win back today’s and tomorrow’s Saifur-Oli-Huda.  Without professionals, entrepreneurs, artists and intellectuals, BNP’s future will be dominated by the likes of Lutfuzzaman Babar. Winning the history wars is essential for avoiding that dark future.

…..

our history of political-social-economic struggles that predates 1971 and continues to our time.  This would not mean ignoring 1971, but to put that seminal year in its proper context.  …. our founding leaders like Fazlul Huq and HS Suhrawardy who came before Sheikh Mujibur Rahman and Ziaur Rahman, putting these men in their proper historical context.

….. we have struggled for a democratic polity, or social justice, from the time of British Raj.  Sometimes these struggles have been violent, at other times we had peaceful ‘ballot revolutions’.  Sometimes the leaders betrayed the trust people put on them.  Sometimes they made mistakes.  But overall, we have been making progress.  And ….. make the case for BNP in the context of that march of history.

That’s BNP’s overall challenge for the history wars.  And I do not suggest Mr Rahman has to fight a solo battle.  But if he must engage in political dog fight about dead presidents, I would suggest leaving Mujib alone, and focusing on restoring Zia.

Arguably, Tarique’s initial foray at the history wars was an attempt at this.  Unfortunately, he seems to have made a hash of it, losing the forest for the trees.

For a long time, BNP has tried to establish Zia as the one who declared independence.  In the process, the argument got to a minutae of who got to the radio station and held the mike first, completely missing the historical significance of Zia’s multiple radio speeches.  What was the significance?  The significance was that a serving major in Pakistani army publicly, in English, severed ties with Pakistan and called for an armed resistance.  The significance was not that it was a declaration of independence.  The significance was that it was a declaration of war.  That significance was completely lost.

Now the claim is that Zia was Bangladesh’s first president.  Well, in his first speech, Zia claimed that he was the head of the provisional government.  In the next version, he dropped that bit.  So, is he or isn’t he the first president?

Well, the founding legal document of the country is the Mujibnagar Proclamation, and that says:

We the elected representatives of the people of Bangladesh, as honour bound by the mandate given to us by the people of Bangladesh whose will is supreme duly constituted ourselves into a Constituent Assembly, and having held mutual consultations, and in order to ensure for the people of Bangladesh equality, human dignity and social justice,

Declare and constitute Bangladesh to be sovereign Peoples’ Republic and thereby confirm the declaration of independence already made by Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman,

AND

do hereby affirm and resolve that till such time as a Constitution is framed, Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman shall be the President of the Republic and that Syed Nazrul Islam shall be the Vice President of the Republic

So we can have a nice legal argument that tries to make Zia the first president, and in the process lose a very important aspect of Zia’s action — something that is directly relevant in today’s Bangladesh.

Because Tarique said so, it’s now becoming BNP’s holy truth that Zia was the first president.  In the process, the fact that Major Zia swore allegiance and subservience to a democratically elected civilian political leadership is completely lost.  Zia’s bravery is March 1971 is to be lauded.  But for BNP, it’s also important to highlight his political maturity, and dedication to civilian, constitutional rule.  And that is exactly what he displayed on 15 August 1975, when he reminded Major General Shafiullah that the president might be dead, there was still a constitution and a vice president.  Whether in 1971 or 1975, Zia deferred to the civilian leadership and constitutionalism.   The relevance for an eventual post-AL Bangladesh is self-evident.

As it happens, Tarique Rahman was not the first person to claim that Zia is our first president.  In November-December 1987, Dhaka was rocked by a series of hartals that nearly brought down the Ershad regime.  Emergency had to be declared, and most opposition politicians were arrested.  Then, on 15-16 December, posters emerged around the city.  One had Mujib’s wireless message to Chittagong declaring independence, apparently sent before the midnight crackdown.  The other claimed Zia as the first president.

Oh, Ershad stayed in power for three more years.  How much more time is BNP’s history wars giving the current regime?

Failure of Politics?

By Ariful Hossain Tuhin

I usually don’t watch television. But my father is a passionate viewer of all kind of political talk shows, especially “ajker bangladesh” from independent tv.

Last night i was temporarily paused when some remarks from a guy in “ajker bangladesh” caught my ear.

Some lawyer i guess affiliated with AL, was saying something like this,

“Why don’t BNP create a popular movement to pressure government?”. Khaled mohiuddin, who runs the show, interrupted and told,

“How can BNP create a peaceful popular movement if the government fires live rounds even if its not a violent movement”

That guy answered along these lines

“The blame goes to BNP, if there were 200 people, police disperse them with sticks, if there were 2000 people, police fires at them, if there were 200000 people, police would not have done anything”

I was kind of shell shocked.

So the “freedom of association” clause in the constitution has condition of “head count” according to this lawyer guy. I don’t know where did he got his law degree.

This is a very dangerous way of thinking. The liberal democratic values dictates that , the state has to justify its use of force. Otherwise it has no right to suppress any kind of political protest even if it dislikes it. Yes i understand there are cases when BNP and jamat resorted to violent means where police may have the justification to use force. In all circumstances, they have to held accountable. A state can not behave in an arbitrary way, otherwise the very foundation of the state become void and illegitimate.

Liberals who are still supporting AL in this issue, that is, suppressing each and every BNP protests/rallies, have to do some soul searching. Where is exactly is their “liberal conscience “? This way the gets a kind of dangerous impunity which has a lot of side effects.

Its just a matter of time, that those police will attack preemptively in other scenarios. Just like they violently attacked primary school teachers, garment workers. It will turn against the liberal themselves if they fall out of favor just like Gonojagoron moncho.

This is not a debatable issue as our constitution guarantees “freedom of association”. And if there is no evidence of “violence”, the state has no choice to abide by it.

I once read in a article criticizing our constitution, I can’t cite it, because it was published in a print journal, where it was claimed that the the fundamental rights guaranteed in our constitution can not be enforced by a court(Like it can be enforced in USA). That means, i can’t file a writ petition to ask the court to enforce my “freedom of speech” and “freedom of association”. I’m not an expert, but if that’s the case, then constitution has little practical value as the court will not be able to check the state if the state violates fundamental rights. The argument put forwarded in that article was There are certain portion of the constitution which can not be enforced by the court. This is a serious shortcoming. (If anybody interested i can give him the copy of the journal)

Another thing is that guy subconsciously stated an obvious. Its not possible to overthrow this government by normal democratic politics. As he claimed , the state’s gun will only be silent if there were 2000000 people. So only an angry mob with pitchfork can make them behave. The government doesn’t believe in rule of law. They believe in mob justice. I should thank him for this simple honesty.

A Sentimental (mis) Education.

By  Seema Amin

 

As the country broke out into camps protecting sentiments, religious and nationalist, the last few weeks, two words stole into my orifices like some perfumed incense, flavored femme fatale, and I followed it, to this public domain where one is still able to speak or squeak. The two words constitute a single idea.  Sentimental education— something I rather arbitrarily associate with the garden-inscribed, Manor-library sensibilities of characters in Jane Austen novels, although it originates in French literature, in Gustave Flaubert’s book of the same name. So what is a sentimental education, a mere education in literature? Ah, less than that, an education that arouses an inactive passion, one that remains suspended in that image-world of dreams. At times when I discuss the never mirthless politics of Bangladesh with my art critic colleagues, I often get a feeling they think politics is a sentimental vocation, a creature of ‘abeg.’ None of these alternative words to sentiments—passion and ‘abeg’– adequately describe the distance between a trigger-happy sentimentality, swift to offer others as lambs to the slaughter, and the wild, white terrain of dispassionate justice (think Anna Akmatova) that I associate with conscience: a kind of antithesis of the lynch mob justice of the kind that took place on October 6th, when Sundarban villagers and police beat robbers mercilessly until they could not walk in what was reported later as shootouts and gunfights…But let me describe the distance through the window of an event that has almost disappeared from collective memory.

The day the police locked the gates of the worker-occupied Tuba factory in Hossain market (August 6th), many of the female workers had been on hunger strike for a week, many were lying beside Sramik Oikya Forum leader Moshrefa Mishu while others were sitting on the table tops where clothes are made. The day they broke in, August 7th, these men in blue found the girls protecting Mishu and others in an unbreakable outer circle. One particular officer, demanding the leaders of the movement come forward, threatened to ‘Rape all of them’, and hurled other names…police literacy in such slang seems remarkably high. The girls, they refused to budge. Finally, as they pushed into the inner circle, the girls and their male co-workers were forced forward, moving in ripples, some falling down the stairs…taking beatings, but never quite giving up the protective space. Outside loitered what remained of the mixed bag of League goons, police women and dalal workers (as we called them) who had already fought skirmishes with workers, injuring solidarity activists, the day before. Not much remained in the form of a human chain outside…Buses were ready to pick up the workers and take them to receive diminished pay and benefits months late.

In my piece in New Age that came out the day before the police broke into the factory, I heralded superlative new worlds, a ‘paradigm shift.’  On hindsight, it appears to me as perfectly obtuse, but, I knew it was some kind of delirious hope that was working in the midst of things.  But I’ve never had the misgiving– even after Delwar Hossian got his way, using workers’ salaries and bonus as a bargaining chip for his bail, and we walked not blindly but rather wide-eyed into his trap—that what we or they were doing was ‘sentimental’. Everyone present at was moved by something more akin to ‘following a truth to its logical conclusion.’ They would not be blackmailed. Yes, some vanguardism, but again, hardly sentimental.

And it is this distance between venturing a notion of justice and approximating it—that journey between a principle and its actualization in struggle (admittedly a fetishized word of the left) — that distinguishes this ‘un-sentimental’ world from the world where sentiments are protected by law, the mob or by the self-proclaimed guardians of the sentiments or the ideology of the language movement and liberation war, a world where there is not a split-second between a trigger and its target.  The ‘students’ of a sentimental education did not stop to consider the pages of history books, nor offer a reason why suddenly nine others were also blacklisted from Shahid Minar without having any association whatsoever with a dangerously ubiquitous term, ‘Razakar.’   And yet, it is hard to tell off these madmen pursuing the injury to ‘sentiments.’ Not too long ago much more historically literate students and activists were running here and there, their sentiments also hurt, almost before a thought could be formulated…Thus this tendency is not limited to these few young men, to mobs in villages or to guardians of the faith. Some run to embassies, some to mosques, some, now, unfortunately, to the Minar.  I venture the liberation war was not fought over sentiments but deep structural issues and a profound sense of injustice.  The Shabagh movement certainly had more than sentiments to begin with; it had a profound sense of injustice. And the equations were not quite so arbitrary, generalized and simple, in the beginning. But the distance from there to here…warrants some introspection regarding the limitations of a sentimental education, which is all they seemed to have to rely on once the blacklisting began.

If tomorrow, the police who screamed ‘Rape to all of you’ sat on the TV screen and grinned unrepentant, I have a feeling in my gut that sentiments would not run very deep.

We would forgive him, as though he had said a faux-pas as children do.  After all, he too got his sentimental education and it taught him nothing about the dignity of women, much the less workers. One need only read the headlines in the back pages…

Our passions are like our reasons for our actions: not principled, humane or deep, but sentimental, superficial and within our comfort zone.  No white nights charting the immense, dark seas of human action with a moral compass… who cares about ethics when there are Sentiments. And when good and bad are pre-determined, in moral equations that do not even need a child’s exegesis of the assumed Word, a conscience– active, alive, non sentimental– is a luxury.

Des(h)i progressives’ nightmare

“But see, I don’t want to vote for AL. I do not think AL should return to power. We need checks and balances. BNP should come. But how can I vote for BNP when they are in an alliance with JI.”

That’s what a friend told me in December.  I have the deepest respect for this person’s sincerity.  She is a genuine progressive.  She wants a democratic Bangladesh — of this I have no doubt.  And I understand her reasons for aversion to Jamaat — never mind 1971, Jamaat categorically rejects some liberal-progressive tenets such as equal citizenship rights.  Had she said “I will not vote for Jamaat”, I would have accepted it.

But that’s not what she said.  She implicitly rejected BNP for its electoral alliance with Jamaat.

I didn’t engage in a prolonged conversation with her.  She is hardly the only person I know who made that leap about conflating Jamaat and BNP.  Bangladesh is full of self-proclaimed progressives who choose to reject democracy,never mind the facts.  I just don’t have the mental energy to engage in fruitless debates these days.  At least my friend had the decency to not engage in that kind of sophistry.

I didn’t engage in a political discussion with her, but was reminded of her comment after the Indian election.  You see, I had heard similar stuff from my Indian progressive friends.  Way back in the early 2000s, I heard people say “don’t want to vote for Congress, don’t like the sycophancy/dynasty, and the Vajpayee government isn’t so bad, but you know, how can BJP be supported when they have someone like Modi”.

And now Modi is the prime minister.

My Indian friends could have supported Vajpayee or other moderates in BJP/NDA government.  They could have provided the left flank of a genuinely centrist alternative to Congress.  But their self-inflicted intellectual blind spot meant that they couldn’t even contemplate such a course — never mind that such an alternative would have served India well.

A lot of things contributed to Mr Modi’s rise to power.  The progressives’ blind spot is just one factor, and probably not even an important one.  But to the extent that he represents a lot of things progressives loath, they have no one but themselves to blame.

I fear whether someday my Bangladeshi progressive friend will wake up to her political nightmare.  Jamaat’s importance in Bangladesh is constantly over-rated, and BNP’s strength under-rated, by everyone.  Of course, Jamaat benefits from the inflated power projection.  And the Jamaat bogey suits the Awamis fine.  The thing is, as the centrist opposition is systematically denied any political space, and as the ruling party degenerates into an orgy of violence (google Narayanganj / Feni murders), Islamists (Jamaat or otherwise) may well emerge as the only alternative.

My friend is genuine progressive, not a closet Awami fascist.  Will people like her act to prevent their own worst nightmare?

http://jrahman.wordpress.com/

Major Zia’s war

A few years ago, I noted how the typical discourse on Ziaur Rahman is full of lies. An (Awami League supporting) old friend asked me to write a positive account of Zia’s politics: instead of rebutting X, write about Y, he told me. This (painfully slowly progressing) series is an attempt at that. Meanwhile, a regular reader asked me to write about Zia’s role during the war — not to refute the preposterous propaganda about him being a Pakistani spy, but about what Zia actually did after the radio declarations of March.

Interestingly, not much is readily available on the matter. While it is well known that Major Abu Taher or Major Khaled Mosharraf were injured in the battles of Kamalpur and Kasba respectively, even the typical BNP supporter wouldn’t be able to name a battle Zia was associated with. According to Muyeedul Hassan’s Muldhara ’71 (among other sources), Zia wanted Osmani to establish a war council. I have also heard from a number of freedom fighters that Zia worked hard to build a regular army. But these weren’t exactly the stuff of ‘battlefield valor’.

This well-researched post by the nationalist blogger দাসত্ব shows that Zia was actually quite intricately involved with a number of battles in 1971. I highlight some key points from the post over the fold. All the photos are from his post as well.

Continue Reading

China and India: Leadership in Contrast

1

by Shafiqur Rahman

The Indian Election results are astounding, and that is a euphemism. All the wishful thinking and self-justifying commentaries from secular intellectuals proved to be just that, self-deluding. Even as the exit polls carried on the tradition of failing to capture the complexity of electoral preference of Indian voters, they failed not in predicting the BJP victory but failing to gauge the magnitude of the victory. In terms of representative democracy, this is truly an epochal election in India. There is virtually no main opposition party in the Parliament. Sansad Bhaban, the house of Parliament of India, is really the house of Mr Modi now.

Two things stand out to me in the post-quake landscape of Indian politics. First, with barely 38% of the votes the BJP led coalition now commands 62% of the total seats. With support from one or two smaller regional parties, the NDA coalition can comfortably cross over the hallowed 67% or two third Special Majority mark. And with Special Majority, Emergency Proclamation, Amendment of the Constitution via article 368, Removal of Supreme Court Judges, Removal of President etc. are all within the grasp of an NDA government led by Mr Modi.

This election has been all about Mr Modi and India is now his oyster. Rarely in recent Indian history have hopes and fears of billions of people in and around India been centered on a single personality like now. For his detractors, coronation of Mr Modi raises the spectre of the most notorious human cliché from 1930’s Germany. To his devotees, Mr Modi carries the ambition for an Indian Lee Kwan Yew; who will firmly taking charge of India Incorporated and unleash the dynamism to make the country a world economic and political superpower, not just in theory and potentially but in reality. What Mr Modi will think and do is ‘known unknowns’; to quote from the famous saying of Mr Rumsfeld. In short, dramatic change for better or worse is in the cards and with it entails huge uncertainty. Those who dismiss the potential for disruptive change in an established democracy like India do not pay sufficient heed to the confluence of charismatic and ambitious leadership, large and enthusiastic support from people and resourceful interests and power of mass media in shaping mass psychology; a conjunction that has shown its potency in recent history time and time again. And that brings us to the main thesis of this article, a high level glimpse on the stability and uncertainty of political leadership in democracy and other systems.

Rightly, in this purported Asian Century, all developments in India is compared and contrasted with China, currently the third and the second biggest economies by PPP. Throughout the last two decades, when China has been growing at unprecedented breakneck speed and India was developing at solid, respectable rate but was increasingly falling behind, both Indian and western political commentators comforted the worldwide adherents of plural politics by rationalizing that, while China’s growth is spectacular, it’s economy and society is increasingly in precarious position because of a forced marriage of an autocratic political system with a free-capitalistic economy. India on the other hand was regularly complimented because of the stability and robustness of its plural political system and diverse society. As we can see now that even established and healthy democracies can throw up great uncertainty in the form of unknowns focalized in a singular leadership, it is a good time as any to evaluate the Chinese political leadership during the transformational recent decades.

Chinese economic growth in the last three decades is an unprecedented macro event in recorded human history.  In 1980, real per-capita income of China was one fortieth of an US citizen and now it is almost one-fourth. Analysts say that China will overtake USA as the largest economy in within the next few years. The social change is no less outstanding; in 1980 only a fifth of Chinese people lived in cities, now more than a half does. These dizzying statistics of change often mask another remarkable thing, despite high and regular turnover of people at the apex, Chinese political leadership remained uniquely stable, continuous and focused during these years of tumultuous change. This stability is mainly due to the hierarchical and grouped structure of Chinese leadership and decision-making.

China’s political system is divided into three major institutions: the government, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and the military. The Party sits at the apex, subordinating all others. The Communist Party has 80 million members (5% of Chinese Population) and people only become member after a selective process that can take several years. The Party is organized into three major bodies: the Central Committee, the Politburo, and the Politburo Standing Committee. The Central Committee is comprised of 200 members who are elected in the Party National Congress which is held every five years. Committee members include senior party and government officials, different agency heads, military generals, provincial governors, head of State-owned companies etc. The Central Committee appoints the 25-man Politburo, which is then narrowed even further into a 5 to 9-man Politburo Standing Committee (PSC) that really runs the Party and the country.  Each PSC member generally in is in charge of a portfolio covering a major area such as the economy, legislation, internal security, or propaganda. Although most of the important policy decisions are often dictated from top down in this hierarchy, Central Committee does wield real power through the five years; it sets the direction of policy and leadership changes and ratifies them. There is intense politics and lobbying in the committee between different groups.

Top leader

The seven members of the Politburo Standing Committee (PSC) are ranked in order of primacy, from one to seven. The rankings do not exactly refer to the official post of the members, sometimes members do not hold any official post but still is ranked high and wields huge influence. Usually though, the President and the Prime Minister holds the first and second rank. The most important point of the PSC is that the person at the top is not the leader of the group but the first among equals. It is a consultative and collective decision making body, no one can impose a view upon others; a decision must garner substantial support from the members. The second important feature of the PSC is its regular turnover. There is an enforced retirement age of 68 which effectively limit the term of members, including the top ranked leader. Also leaders who fail to perform are often dropped after the first term or even within term.

The age limit not only curbs unchecked ambition of charismatic leaders but also initiates a long grooming process. The small number of promising people who can rise to the top must be given ministerial or provincial leadership positions in their early and mid-50s so that they can be ready for PSC when they are 60. Many Politburo members in China have been involved in business, corruption or other profit-seeking activities and became fabulously wealthy. But no matter how influential they become, no one can stay beyond the term limit. Also China is notoriously nepotistic; children and family of political leaders enjoy huge perks in all aspects of society. But no one can place their children in top political positions, everyone has to go the long and process of membership, committee, appointments and prove themselves consistently as leader and manager. Interestingly, Engineers and Technical people heavily dominated the previous Chinese top leadership; all members of the 16th PSC (2002-07) were engineers. But six out of the seven members of the current PSC (2012-17) are trained in social sciences. This reflects a more awareness of politics and society than just economic growth.

20-politburo-standing-committee

The gradual evolution to collective leadership has engendered several broad trends in Chinese statecraft. The most visible is the stability and continuity; Chinese policy direction does not make radical changes on whims of new leader but reflects deliberative and broad-based decision-making. This stability is highly prized by international and domestic businesses who regard uncertainty as a principal impediment to long-term business and economic planning.

Secondly, although China is a one-party state where the party seeks to maintain a tight control over the population, current Chinese leadership also recognizes that control can only be achieved by a careful balancing of freedoms and restrictions. The Chinese government pays very close attention to public opinion while trying to control it; the government prioritizes wealth accumulating economic growth but at the same time try to ensure wide distribution of the spoils from growth. There is no magic formula for these kind balances and it is continuously changing. A single-apex leadership system would have been very inadequate for such careful fine tuning; collective decision-making enable a robust leadership mode with sufficient flexibility and rigidity to chart the huge country through tumultuous changes. Chinese leaders clearly see that even among their senior leaders there is divide between those who are more inclined to reforms and liberalization and those who are more conservative. The Chinese leadership institutionalized robustness in leadership by ensuring that both camps are adequately represented in the highest bodies but no camp gains an overwhelming advantage.

This collective leadership arose a lot due to the three-decade long all-powerful and capricious rule of Mao Zedong. During Mao’s rule the PSC was a totally ineffectual body and there were no mechanism or institution to check Mao’s disastrous policy decisions like the Great Leap Forward in the 1950s or the Cultural Revolution in the 1960s. After Mao’s death Deng Xiaoping started to develop rules to govern decision-making at the top level and manage power succession. From 12th Party Congress gradually the new rules were introduced and by the Congress in 2002 most of the current implicit and explicit rules have become established.

A similar reaction also took place in the Soviet leadership during the Communist Party rule. Stalin’s rule (1922-53) was the archetype of godlike, dictatorial regime. After Stalin there was strong demand for collective leadership at the top. Nikita Khrushchev was largely ousted from leadership because of his failure to institute collective leadership. After him, the regimes of Brezhnev, Andropov, Chernenko all had strong collective leadership. Perestroika; the policy that opened up the Soviet Union and initiate its eventual demise, did not spring out of the head of Mikhail Gorbachev alone; there were lot of institution support for far-reaching change from various quarter of the Soviet Central Committee. Even then Gorbachev had to do continuous to-and-from with politburo members to get majority approval for his policy changes. Many historians would contend that the group-leadership of the Soviet Politburo during the Cold War was no more irrational or arbitrary than the elected Presidential leaders of America. Soviet Union failed because of failure of economic system not political leadership; a lesson the Chinese leaders internalized assiduously.

Political scientists construct the spectrum of leadership by democratic and autocratic leadership at two extremes. Democratic leadership style supposedly emphasize group participation, discussion, and group decisions while an autocratic leader keeps tight control over group decisions and determines all policies only through own consent. Curiously there are often mismatch between leadership and politics. Democratic system throws up autocratic leaders quite often and sometimes autocratic systems have remarkable democratic decision-making process. We in Bangladesh need no lesson in how democratic elections can produce the most autocratic leaders. Interestingly, most established and mature democracies have a democratic system of electing leaders but give remarkably autocratic and arbitrary decision making power to the top. Most often, democratically elected leaders are moderate and reasonable men but occasionally we also see leaders like man-on-a-mission George W Bush, who religiously believed he has divine mandate.

Democracy is not just a system of selecting leaders democratically but also checking bad decisions of elected leaders and getting rid of them easily when they fail dismally. The Chinese collective leadership with its institutionalized development of leaders, group decision making and regular turnover at the top seem to have integrated many of the best features of democratic leadership. This is not an advocacy for Chinese Political system; China is after all a one-party state where people have very little say about the course of their destiny. But we should not overlook the attractive features of the Chinese leadership. Democracy is not a formula but a participatory argument. Democracy should evolve with the need and circumstances of the time and place.

Leadership function arose in the biological world to solve coordination and collective action problem of large groups of social animals. Anthropologists say that pre-civilization human societies had more group decision making than hierarchical leadership. The vast increase of social complexity due to founding of cities and states produced need for powerful, centralized and formal leadership structures. But as the communication and knowledge revolution vastly changed the coordination problem of big societies, the formal-singular leadership system is now increasingly questionable. The paradox of leadership is that versatility, the ability to do multiple, even competing roles is greatly correlated with leadership effectiveness but individuals who can do that are very rare indeed. Democracy is the best method of selecting leaders but even it often fails to find those rare individuals, particularly in countries where the choice is very limited.

Whether one believes in the End of History thesis of Francis Fukuyama or not, one cannot deny that most of the world citizenry now do not hunger for revolutionary change but for improvement and problem-solving. In this day and age, where there is huge pool of expert and informed leaders in every society, entrusting fate of hundreds of millions or even billions upon hit or miss charismatic leaders seem to be risky proposition indeed. Collective leadership as a mechanism of power-sharing through checks and balances among competing political camps, but also incorporating more dynamic and pluralistic decision-making process seem to be more suited for the age we live in.

I believe that single leaders as messiah or savior is out of place in today’s world. We need real time participatory democracy. We need checks against uncertainty of democratically elected dictators and we need mechanisms for diversity and robustness at the top of decision making. How to develop such mechanisms is an argument that we must join vigorously.

Cut the Gordian knot

by Nuraldin Zia

This year started with a rude awakening for the elite Bangladeshi law enforcement agency, Rapid Action Battalion, popularly known as RAB. In an official letter to the inspector general of Bangladesh police, the United States authorities notified that individual members and units of the Rapid Action Battalion are ineligible for any further US training and assistance because of acts of gross violation of human rights committed by the members this elite force.

This allegation against RAB is not a new one. Since its inception as an elite force in March 2004, RAB has continuously been implicated in gross violation of basic human rights. Killing people with alleged criminal backgrounds in the name of crossfire became the ‘signature’ tactic of the force. Human rights groups so far tallied more than 2000 extrajudicial killings which were attributed to RAB.

Despite all the initial allegations against the battalion members, the government of Britain and United States continued their support for years. While the battalion continued to receive military training from Britain and the United States, despite all the allegation of extra judicial killing, the sudden change in heart of the major western backers of RAB is a clear indication that something went very wrong with the way RAB is perceived in the west. The embargo on any further US sponsored training, which was put on the members of RAB is a major blow to the credibility to a force which earned its name and fame fighting Islamic terrorism.

One possible reason the west might have continued supporting RAB despite allegations of extra judicial killing was its success in annihilating the home grown Islamic terrorism that rattled parts of Bangladesh during early part of this decade. Other factors that might weigh in the west’s decision to support RAB was it widespread popularity, professional work ethics as well as its politically blind modus operandi.

However RAB’s work ethics and professionalism started to take a turn towards the worse with ascent of Awami League as ruling party. Starting as early as 2008, RAB, previously criticized for extra-judicial killings of highly vetted criminals, allegedly started getting involved in abductions of businessmen and politicians. In 2009, three RAB men were arrested[i] on charges of abducting two businessmen and robbing them of gold and money.

On June 20 2011, two RAB men were captured by a crowd as they unsuccessfully try to abduct Chowdhury Alam, a local government leader and opposition leader, from Gulshan area of the capital. Later a patrol team of Police rushed to the spot and rescued them. One of the rescued was a RAB personnel identified by the meida as ASI Md Billal Hossain (ID No 314772 and Personnel No 4016801)[ii] belonging to RAB headquarters. Five days later, another group of people allegedly identifying themselves as RAB members kidnapped Mr. Chowdhury Alam. Mr. Alam has not been seen since then.

Apart from abductions, extortions and robbery, RAB continued with extra judicial killings through incidences knows as crossfires and shoot outs. In a recent development, Ain O Salish Kendra – ASK (Legal Aid and Human Rights Organization), Bangladesh cited 49 incidents of extrajudicial killings by law enforcement agencies mostly by RAB, only in the first the two months of 2014. The organization also confirmed 179 extrajudicial deaths in the year 2013. As a result of changing tactics of RAB, ASK could directly attribute 24 such deaths to RAB, 18 to police and for another 137 incidents, an agency could not clearly be linked.

On February 11, 2014 plain clothed armed men identifying themselves as RAB picked up Mridul Kumar Chowdhury in front of his house in Hazari Lane area of Chittagong. Prior to the incident, the gold trader lodged a case against some RAB personnel as they allegedly snatched a consignment of gold he sent to Dhaka. In an interview after being released from RAB custody, Mridul Kumar Chowdhury said that while being tortured by the abductors, he was asked time and again how he ‘dared’ file the case against RAB.

However, a probe committee consisting of law enforcement agency members surprisingly quashed the allegation[iii] clearing RAB of any involvement with the abduction.

The international human rights defender, Human Rights Watch, in all its recent communiques regarding Bangladesh, has recommended disbanding RAB. According to one of its’ recent reports titled ‘Democracy in Crossfire’ HRW unambiguously attributed extrajudicial killings, enforced disappearances, arbitrary arrests and unlawful destruction of private property on RAB personnel.

Human Rights Watch also repeated its call to the government to end the reign of impunity enjoyed by members of Bangladesh’s security forces working in RAB. They also urged to try the RAB members responsible for criminal offences.

Although RAB has been involved in such crimes for the last several years, the recent murder of seven people in Narayanganj has put RAB back into intense public scrutiny. As one followed the series of events leading to the discovery of seven corpses in Shitalakhya, it seemed that the RAB had turned into a mercenary force, a ruthless group of professional killers, who instead of working against the criminal godfathers had started working for the criminal godfathers in exchange of a hefty sum of money. Under intense publicity of the incident and as a result of loud public hue and cry, three seniors officers of RAB perceived to be responsible for the Narayanganj killings have been forced to go into retirement.

Data received from the RAB Headquarters says that almost two thousand RAB men[iv] faced departmental actions for committing criminal offences since 2004. That means, on an average, 16 members of the battalion had to be disciplined every month. These numbers draw an alarming picture of the current state of RAB. First, when 2000 members of a force with total membership of approximately 11000 are convicted of criminal offense, meaning nearly 1 in 5 RAB personnel are convicted of some form of crime and secondly when totally mind-blowing and credible allegations of acting as professional killers on behalf of notorious criminals surfaces against the whole senior leadership of a battalion; it becomes a very legitimate question whether this agency should exist as a guardian of rule of law. One of the most serious allegations about RAB is that the government has lost its control over the force.

There are clear indications that the force is totally demoralized and has lost its way. It is high time to take the sternest decision regarding this rogue force and disband it if needed. The sooner, the better.

 

[i] http://bdnews24.com/bangladesh/2009/10/04/rab-men-arrested-on-abduction-mugging-charges

 

[ii] http://archive.thedailystar.net/newDesign/news-details.php?nid=163708

 

[iii] http://bdnews24.com/bangladesh/2014/03/18/rab-cleared-of-abduction-charge

 

[iv] http://bdnews24.com/bangladesh/2014/05/11/2000-rab-men-punished-in-10-years

Reflections on Islamist politics in the Bangladesh context

5

by Anon

Let us define the Islamist voter as someone who would blindly vote any party or candidate basing their platform on Islam.  Vast majority of such voters in Bangladesh do not have more than few years of formal schooling.  And the small minority that is educated are not capable of leading the rest because these two groups of Islamist voters have quite different visions of Islam.

 

And this difference in how Islam is to be envisaged goes many years back to the 11th century, when a schism emerged among the Muslims on education and knowledge.  Specifically, Imam Gazali called for madrassah education to focus only on religious study, ignoring science, statecraft, philosophy and mathematics.

 

When Muslims conquered Syria they came across hundreds of books by Greek philosophers and mathematicians. During the Abbasid Caliphate starting from 750 AD, Muslims actively searched, translated and disseminated such books of knowledge under royal patron ship. Although many of the ideas in those books contradicted Muslim cultural and religious beliefs at that time, they still went ahead with studying and distributing them in the interest of acquiring knowledge. Meanwhile Europe was in the dark ages where all scholarship was confined into monastery based theological studies.

 

But things turned upside down from the effects of Crusade and then Mongol invasion. From the interactions of European Christians and Arab Muslims, the Europeans acquired the secular study of knowledge in the Arab lands and the Muslims took up the Church-based education of Europe. The hope continuing the tradition of Ibne Rushd, Ibne Sina, Al-Beruni, Al-Khwarizmi, Al-Farabi, Al-Kindi, Jabir Al-Haiyan etc, withered into nothing.

 

Imam Gazali was chiefly responsible for this. He forbid all heretical ideas and thoughts to preserve Islam. He fiercely attacked Ibne Sina in his book Tahafut Al Falasifa. Because of the vehemence of his attacks, even bold thinkers like Omar Khayyam withdrew from broadcasting their ideas vigorously. Because of Gazali, madrassah education, which was the only mass education system for youth apart from the universities for higher education, confined itself only on religious studies. But there were oppositions to this restriction in mass education in different parts of the Muslim world.

 

Eventually, this schism led to three regional schools: a science oriented one based on Egypt’s Al Azhar; a syncretistic one in Turkey; and a religion-focused one based in Samarkent.

 

Bangladesh’s madrassahs are the heir to the Islamic discourse written in Farsi a millennium ago in Samarkent.  The Samarkent school was abolished by the Soviets, but its literature survived in the madrassahs of Afghanistan, Pakistan, India (Deoband) and Bangladesh’s qaumi madrassahs.

 

The textbooks used in Bangladeshi madrassahs are all based on the Samarkent school literature, and are written in Farsi or archaic Urdu.  Indeed, there are instances of Hadiths of questionable authenticity taught in our madrassahs based on this literature.  For example, only recently such a dubious Hadith was circulated in social media, claiming that the Prophet (pbuh) ordered us to attack India.  Being the heir of the Samarkent school, madrassah students of Bangladesh tend to read archaic Urdu and Farsi more than modern Arabic-Farsi-Urdu.

 

After 9/11/2001, modernisation of Bangladesh’s madrassahs became a priority.  The then BNP government, with the assistance of Jamaat and large foreign funding, attempted a modernisation drive.  This led to an intense conflict between qaumi madrassahs and aliya madrassahs and those trained from Medina University — with the latter denounced as Jew-trained-heretic by some eminent leaders of the qaumi madrassahs.

 

The Imams of nine out of ten mosques in Bangladesh are from these qaumi madrassahs.  They are the role models of Bangladeshi Islamists.  Scholars from different schools are viewed with suspicion by those trained in the Samarkent tradition. To expect modernising Islamists like Fetullah Gulen or Tariq Ramadan is thus unrealistic in the Bangladeshi context.

 

And how big is the Islamist vote in Bangladesh anyway?  Let’s think about it through attendance at mosques.  The same mosque that can’t fit the jamaat on a Friday, causing a traffic jam outside, can’t find a single line of Muslims for the Fajr prayer.  That is the blunt reality of Islamism in Bangladesh.

 

The apparent rise of Islamism in today’s Bangladesh is a socio-cultural reaction against Awami misrule and Shahbagi cultural hubris.  It is similar to the socio-cultural reaction against the upper caste Hindu chauvinism a century ago.  Just like the Muslim League politics ended after partition, sympathy for the Islamists will also wane once the political scene changes.

 

Before an Islamic revolution is even plausible in Bangladesh, Islam has to be actually practiced along side science and technology.  Vast majority of us practice neither.  Those who practice both however don’t represent the Samarkent traditionalists, who are the actual Islamists.

 

And that’s why Islamist politics is a non-starter in Bangladesh.

(Picture Bayt al-Hikma was a librarytranslation institute and school established in Abbasid-era BaghdadIraq)

Islamophobia is no Cry Wolf (A compilation)

In a huffingtonpost article, “The Phobia of Being Called Islamophobic” (28/4/14) by Ali A. Rizvi a Pakistani-Canadian writer is saying that Muslims in the west are using Islamophobia label to suppress genuine criticism of Muslims and Islam. He is saying that just as powerful Jewish groups have suppressed objective criticism of Israel’s policy and practice by the Anti-Semitic label in the past decades, Muslim groups in the west are now seeking to quash all criticism of Islam and Muslims. In Author’s own words

 

“In addition to calling out prejudice against Muslims (a people), the term “Islamophobia” seeks to shield Islam itself (an ideology) from criticism. It’s as if every time you said smoking was a filthy habit, you were perceived to be calling all smokers filthy people. Human beings have rights and are entitled to respect. But when did we start extending those rights to ideas, books, and beliefs? You’d think the difference would be clear, but it isn’t. The ploy has worked over and over again, and now everyone seems petrified of being tagged with this label.

The phobia of being called “Islamophobic” is on the rise — and it’s becoming much more rampant, powerful, and dangerous than Islamophobia itself.”

(http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ali-a-rizvi/the-phobia-of-being-calle_b_5215218.html)

The main example the author puts in the article is a recent, much publicized episode about Brandeis University and Ayaan Hirsi Ali. (Those who are not familiar with Ayaan Hirsi Ali should please look her up in Wikipedia). The latest controversy began when Brandeis  University, a well-known Liberal US university known for its progressive Jewish roots, decided to confer honorary Doctorate to Ayann Hirsi Ali and few other noted personalities.

The decision immediately drew widespread condemnation from different groups, some of them Islamic, because of Ms Ali’s widely known anti-Islamic views. Bloggers and students took the initiative in protesting the decision of Brandeis  University and then Muslim advocacy groups joined them.  Council on American-Islamic Relations contacted its members though email and social media, and urging them to complain to the university. Ibrahim Hooper, a spokesman for CAIR said “She is one of the worst of the worst of the Islam haters in America, not only in America but worldwide. I don’t assign any ill will to Brandeis. I think they just kind of got fooled a little bit.”

(http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/09/us/brandeis-cancels-plan-to-give-honorary-degree-to-ayaan-hirsi-ali-a-critic-of-islam.html)

Even the faculty of Brandeis  University joined the protest. In a publicized open letter signed by many of them, they said,

Dear President Lawrence,

We are writing to urge you to rescind immediately the invitation to Ms. Ayaan Hirsi Ali for an honorary doctorate, a decision about which we are shocked and dismayed, owing to her virulently anti-Muslim public statements. 

A few of many examples will suffice. David Cohen quotes Ms. Hirsi Ali as saying: “Violence is inherent in Islam – it’s a destructive, nihilistic cult of death. It legitimates murder. The police may foil plots and freeze bank accounts in the short term, but the battle against terrorism will ultimately be lost unless we realise that it’s not just with extremist elements within Islam, but the ideology of Islam itself….Islam is the new fascism” (LondonEvening Standard, 2-7-07).

We are filled with shame at the suggestion that the above-quoted sentiments express Brandeis’s values.

We are saddened that Brandeis would choose to honor such a divisive individual at commencement, a moment of unity for the Brandeis community.  Her presence threatens to bring unnecessary controversy to an event that should rightly be about celebrating Brandeis’ graduates and their families. 

The selection of Ms. Hirsi Ali further suggests to the public that violence toward girls and women is particular to Islam or the Two-Thirds World, thereby obscuring such violence in our midst among non-Muslims, including on our own campus. It also obscures the hard work on the ground by committed Muslim feminist and other progressive Muslim activists and scholars, who find support for gender and other equality within the Muslim tradition and are effective at achieving it. We cannot accept Ms. Hirsi Ali’s triumphalist narrative of western civilization, rooted in a core belief of the cultural backwardness of non-western peoples.”

(http://www.truthrevolt.org/news/revealed-brandeis-faculty-letter-pressured-president-drop-hirsi-ali)

Faced with such diverse criticism,Brandeis  University withdrew the decision to confer PHD to Ayaan Hirsi Ali. Its statement said, “We cannot overlook that certain of her past statements are inconsistent with Brandeis University’s core values. Ms. Hirsi Ali is welcome to join us on campus in the future to engage in a dialogue. Universities consider it important to make a distinction between inviting a speaker who may air unpopular or provocative views that the institution does not endorse, and awarding an honorary degree, which is more akin to affirming the body of a recipient’s work.”

Immediately after Brandeis  made this decision to withdraw, the right wing and anti-Islam dedia in USA erupted in furious condemnation. A sample of their view of the matter.

“conservative media figures have rushed to defend Hirsi Ali, some using her life experience to explain away her Islamophobic comments. Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol called the move an “example of a war on women” and argued that the university had “caved to Muslim thugs.” Fox News’ Sean Hannity said the university’s decision was an “example of left-wing appeasement.” On April 10, Fox contributor Monica Crowley asked, “Where are the moderate Muslims? Where are people who, like Ali, have left the faith and are willing to courageously speak about it? And yet when somebody does show the guts and gets out there to do it, this is how they’re treated?”

(http://mediamatters.org/blog/2014/04/11/why-aayan-hirsi-ali-gets-a-conservative-media-s/198856)

This view of ‘Muslim thugs’ using Islamophobia label to stop debate and discussion of Islam is the main topic of the article I first mentioned. Reading the article in the morning, I got reminded of the famous Aesop story of ‘Cry Wolf’, how the boy cried wolf when the wolf is not there. But the problem is that often the wolf is really there, waiting to devour the herd of sheep. One can easily find lots of example of Ayaan Hirsi Ali’s deeply prejudiced and hateful words against Islam and Muslims. Just a small sample here would suffice.

In An interview with Reason magazine in 2007 is where she elaborated her view on Islam most clearly.

Reason: Should we acknowledge that organized religion has sometimes sparked precisely the kinds of emancipation movements that could lift Islam into modern times? Slavery in the United States ended in part because of opposition by prominent church members and the communities they galvanized. The Polish Catholic Church helped defeat the Jaruzelski puppet regime. Do you think Islam could bring about similar social and political changes?

Hirsi Ali: Only if Islam is defeated. Because right now, the political side of Islam, the power-hungry expansionist side of Islam, has become superior to the Sufis and the Ismailis and the peace-seeking Muslims.

Reason: Don’t you mean defeating radical Islam?

Hirsi Ali: No. Islam, period. Once it’s defeated, it can mutate into something peaceful. It’s very difficult to even talk about peace now. They’re not interested in peace.

Reason: We have to crush the world’s 1.5 billion Muslims under our boot? In concrete terms, what does that mean, “defeat Islam”?

Hirsi Ali: I think that we are at war with Islam. And there’s no middle ground in wars. Islam can be defeated in many ways. For starters, you stop the spread of the ideology itself; at present, there are native Westerners converting to Islam, and they’re the most fanatical sometimes. There is infiltration of Islam in the schools and universities of the West. You stop that. You stop the symbol burning and the effigy burning, and you look them in the eye and flex your muscles and you say, “This is a warning. We won’t accept this anymore.” There comes a moment when you crush your enemy.

Reason: Militarily?

Hirsi Ali: In all forms, and if you don’t do that, then you have to live with the consequence of being crushed.

 

Reason: In Holland, you wanted to introduce a special permit system for Islamic schools, correct?

Hirsi Ali: I wanted to get rid of them. I wanted to have them all closed, but my party said it wouldn’t fly. Top people in the party privately expressed that they agreed with me, but said, “We won’t get a majority to do that,” so it never went anywhere.

Reason: Well, your proposal went against Article 23 of the Dutch Constitution, which guarantees that religious movements may teach children in religious schools and says the government must pay for this if minimum standards are met. So it couldn’t be done. Would you in fact advocate that again?

Hirsi Ali: Oh, yeah.

Reason: Here in the United States, you’d advocate the abolition of—

Hirsi Ali: All Muslim schools. Close them down. Yeah, that sounds absolutist. I think 10 years ago things were different, but now the jihadi genie is out of the bottle. I’ve been saying this in Australia and in the U.K. and so on, and I get exactly the same arguments: The Constitution doesn’t allow it. But we need to ask where these constitutions came from to start with—what’s the history of Article 23 in the Netherlands, for instance? There were no Muslim schools when the constitution was written. There were no jihadists. They had no idea.

 

(http://reason.com/archives/2007/10/10/the-trouble-is-the-west/singlepage)

 

We all know of the Norwegian Islamophobe Anders Brevik who killed 80 young kids and adults because he felt Europe was silently falling under Muslim domination. Ayaan Hisri Ali was an inspiration for Brevik. Hirsi Ali later in a speech said that she should not be blamed for Brevik’s hate crime but the culture of silence about true nature of Islam.

 

[T]hat one man who killed 77 people in Norway, because he fears that Europe will be overrun by Islam, may have cited the work of those who speak and write against political Islam in Europe and America – myself among them – but he does not say in his 1500 page manifesto that it was these people who inspired him to kill. He says very clearly that it was the advocates of silence. Because all outlets to express his views were censored, he says, he had no other choice but to use violence.”

(http://www.loonwatch.com/2012/05/ayaan-hirsi-ali-sympathizes-with-terrorist-anders-behring-breivik/)

We can really see that sometimes Islamophobe label is very appropriate. People like Ayaan Hirsi Ali promote hatred and intolerance that should not be awarded recognition in a democratic society. But the most important take in this episode is how Islamophobia has fallen from fashion to stigma in US public life. 8-10 years ago, Ayaan Hirsi Ali’s views would have been mainstream and Muslim groups would not dare to be very vocal against such bigotry. If if they protested, their protest would have been drowned by a flood of anti-Islam rhetoric from the right and the left. But the world has changed and particularly America. Muslims and Islam are increasingly seen as essential part of American life.

A blog post in Economist magazine perhaps gives the best verdict of the latest Ayaan Hirsi Ali brouhaha from a detached point of view.

“ In deciding to rescind its offer of an honorary degree to her, Brandeis was in part drawing a line between the kind of discourse on religion that is acceptable in mainstream American intellectual life, and the kind that has arisen over the past decade and a half in the Netherlands. The university was not silencing Ms Hirsi Ali; it still invited her to come to the university to “engage in a dialogue”. As Isaac Chotiner puts it, the “controversy isn’t about shunning someone from polite society. It is about giving a person an honorary degree.” Asking Ms Hirsi Ali to speak to students at Brandeis is a great idea; giving her an honorary degree as part of graduation ceremonies suggests that Brandeis thinks calling for a war on Islam is an acceptable statement within the bounds of normal political and social discourse. The fact that such statements are not welcomed in American public discourse is one reason why the American model of integration and tolerance works better than the Dutch model, and why the Netherlands continues to be wracked by tensions over Islam and integration—years after those tensions forced Ms Hirsi Ali herself to leave.”

(http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2014/04/ayaan-hirsi-ali)

Reviving BNP — what are we talking about?

If there is one constant refrain in Bangladeshi political punditry, it is that BNP as a political party has no future, it is broken beyond repair, it really stands for nothing, why, BNP means Basically No Party.  But defying these pundits, BNP keeps bouncing back.  And yet, some pundits keep ignoring the facts of BNP’s resilience, and continue to harp on about BNP’s imminent demise.

The thing is, cacophony of these pundits actually drown out some very legitimate critical analysis of BNP, analysis that BNP leaders and supporters would do well to dwell on at length.  This post provides a framework to think about these critical analyses.

Continue Reading

Accommodating the New Imperial Order: The Dhaka Tribune and the Ruling Culture of Subservience

By Surma

They plunder, they slaughter, and they steal: this they falsely name Empire (Superpower), and where they make a wasteland, they call it peace – Tacitus (56 – 117 AD)

Have you heard the one about the Bangladeshi farmer and the Indian Border Guard?

felani.jpg

Picture of 15 year old Felani killed by Indian Border Guards (BSF) on the 7 January 2011

There was once a Bangladeshi farmer who was ploughing his fields with his cattle near the Indian Border. The Indian border guards (BSF) as part of their live exercises, for the sake of target practice, crossed the border shot the farmer and took his cattle. The BSF re-brand the cattle as Indian cattle and then sell it to an Indian cattle smuggler, who in turn smuggles the cattle into Bangladesh, with the help of the BSF, and sells at a premium. All this time our helpless Bangladeshi farmer is lying in his field bleeding to death.

First the the local Awami League Chairman comes along, see’s the farmer walks over the farmer, crosses the border and has tea with the BSF guards at their station.

Second, a civil society, Sushil type, Nirmul Committee member comes along, see’s the farmer, takes pictures and then crosses the border and writes a report with the BSF guards. In the report the farmer was part of international Islamist terror network, and his cattles were being used to fund that terror network, thus both the farmer and his cattle created an existential threat to the Bangladeshi state and needed to be neutralised.

Third, a correspondent from the Dhaka Tribune arrives and takes an interview of the farmer, noting down all the facts, then writes a sympathetic piece in the paper about the problems faced of being an Indian Border Guard.

The above comical anecdote sadly reflects the state of affairs that is amongst the ruling clique, political and civil in Bangladesh. A culture of submission to an aggressive foreign power, which regularly kills citizens of the country, interferes in domestic politics and is economically exploiting the country’s resources. It is a culture of subservience which permeates the ruling Awami League, to a myopic civil society members, whose indignity is masked by spineless corporate media.  This pro india bias was recently highlighted by former ambassador Sirajul Islam, in the Weekly Holiday. The Dhaka Tribunes role of propaganda as an extension of the state was confirmed when it and its editor Zafar Sobhan received an award by the Better Bangladesh Bangladesh Foundation (BBF) for creating a better image for the country. The other awardees are (post Rana Plaza) Bangladesh Garment Manufacturers and Exporters Association for its contribution in the garment sector, the (post internationally criticised elections) Ministry of Foreign Affairs for contribution in the field of international relations, Bangladesh Armed Forces for serving in the United Nations Peace Support Operations and International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) for its role during the Liberation War and Foreign Minister AH Mahmood Ali.

Policy of Appeasement – ‘Please Sir, can I have some more!’

muncih 1938.jpgoliver twist.jpg

(l) Neville Chamberlain proclaiming foolishly ‘peace in our times’, after rewarding Nazi aggression at Munich 1938. ( r) Famous scene from Oliver Twist 1968, ‘Please sir can i have some more!’

This culture of subservience reached new heights, with the recent editorial by the Dhaka Tribune by its editor Zafar Sobhan, where he beseeches the Indians to extend the cricketing Indian Premier League into Bangladesh:

“The most obvious way in which to do this would be to let Dhaka bid for a franchise in the next application process and let economics sort it out. With a catchment area that would comprise the entire country in terms of local fan base, or even simply taking Dhaka as the focal metropolis, such a franchise would be a better bet than some that are already in the IPL”

The article and its timing displayed new a new marker for the paper, in its ‘Walter Mitty’, type editorial policy, a new level of a comic detachment from the reality faced by ordinary Bangladeshis. Instead of confronting criticism of the papers Islamophobic and pro India bias, the article just confirmed those accusations and further silenced an ever decreasing number of sympathisers, The reality on the ground, which the paper ignores and is insensitive to, is that one sided elections were held with the open support of the Indian government, with a brutal security crackdown with an alleged assist from the Indian army, all held against the backdrop of an increasing number of Bangladeshi citizens being killed by the Indian security forces at the border.

The content and timing of the piece could be interpreted as a rerun of Munich 1938, where instead of aggression against the sovereignty of a neighbouring country being opposed and resisted, we have a cringe worthy acceptance of the aggression by masking it up and seeking to reward such aggression, in this case unilaterally seeking an IPL franchise.

The ignorance multiplier effect – one import size fits all

The proposal shows an incredible disregard for developing Bangladeshi cricket, which can be throttled by importation of franchise and precious resources being diverted to it. Instead of advocating investment and development of local clubs, the newspaper’s solution, like so many other solutions adopted in current Bangladesh, is to import a ready made manufactured Indian solution. This is in the foolish belief that such a solution, of a single franchise, is for the benefit of development of the game in a country of over 150 million.

A similar dynamic, rather stagmatic, can be observed in every domain of indigenous social-technological development, from water resources engineering, to urban planning and education. The systematic undernourishment of our own talents is no basis for a state with pretensions of autonomy. Realise this, even (y)our foreign development partners are laughing all the way to the bank and up their career ladders

The attitude in the paper seems to be hangover of the Mujib-era one party state of the early 70s, where dogma superseded practical technicalities. Then it was the import of ill fitting Soviet blueprints, now we have the advocacy of ill fitting, counter productive Indian ones, for our politics, culture, economics and now cricket. For too long, the Dhaka Tribune and its ilk, has gotten away with weaving a fairytale of Bangladesh. Until people start complaining – and loudly too – the corporate media agenda will be shaped by supporters of government, pro AL big business and Indian foreign policy. That does not just subvert honest journalism: it undermines our democracy.

famine 1974.jpgdefinition of journalism.jpg

(l) Scene from the famine of 1974, mainly caused by the political and economic ineptitude of the government of the day. ( r) Memo to the Dhaka Tribune and the corporate media of Bangladesh, from a real journalist, George Orwell.

Fruits of her labour ​​

2

– By Seema Amin

The hair strands of time, were they highlighted, would strike a striking look in 2009.

A few vermilion slashes down the back of the head (for a mutiny-cum-massacre), some gray-tinted purples (inaugural stones in buildings) and ….an almost imperceptible greenish-blue for the Indian Ocean Island of Mauritius; the Mauritian incident, that is, buried in the general darkness of that year…

The Mumbai bombs gregariously exploded in 2008; one of the recovered traces of the ‘terrorists’ was a forged passport purportedly belonging to a Mauritian. The slight of build, coral-bejeweled State of Mauritius alleged that it was the passport of a Bangladeshi migrant labourer with footprints leading to the EPZs, where migrant labour, composed largely of women from China and Bangladesh, constitutes the majority of workers. One hungry (or should we say ‘weak’) state accused another. ..

beasts-of-the-southern-wild-movie-photo-13

Ramola Ramtohul, in ‘The influence of state patriarchy and sexual politics on contract labour migration policy in Mauritius,’ (2010) notes that were it not for then Foreign Minister Dipu Moni’s pleading with the state, the latter’s decision to deport all Bangladeshi male workers from its Export Processing Zones (EPZs) would have been official policy following the 2008 Mumbai blast; she argues that the state’s patriarchal stance in deporting men, rather than women, reveals not only that such potential threats work to further weaken the power of migrant labour in the EPZs but that the unwritten codes of the new international strategy of labour demasculinizes male migrant labourers as part of the processes of feminization in global commodity chains. The attempt to establish oneself as a legitimate citizen, through marriage, and possibly having terrorist links, is termed an illegitimate attempt at ‘regaining masculinity’, where the very qualities of submissiveness, invisibility, informality and vulnerability constitute the (gendered) preference for ‘nimble hands.’ In Bangladesh, these ‘low-skilled’ young women almost never move from ‘operator’ to ‘helper’, much the less, supervisor—reserved for men.

The tale of Bangladeshi men in Mauritius has a few unlikely things to say about intersection of what can be called eroding paternalism and global feminization. The EPZs are constituted of a feminized work force where neither the state nor the suppliers or buyers provide the paternalistic values of protection, i.e. given in more traditional gender structures or in feudal paternalistic relations. Initially, a preference was given to female workers in the textile EPZs(as the industry grew through the MFA–Multi-Fibre-Agreement–and European duty-free access, much like Bangladesh earlier); a decade later, as globalization and the end of the MFA accelerated the race to the bottom, they imported higher numbers of male and female workers from China and India. Ramtohul describes the ‘demasculinization’ of the men as an effect of the high level of state and employer control over the migrant workers, including the the threat of deportation in the case of trade unionism, rendering them (as) powerless (as women are meant to be). Even as the threat of deportation is dangled over men based on ‘illegitimate’ activities, Ramtohul shows how the ‘illegal’ activities of female migrant labour, prostitution, is completely ignored: “The sex trade appears to be treated as a private issue over which officials prefer to remain quiet, as long as it does not hinder the performance of the workers at work. This suits both the employers and the state.” Thus ‘feminization’ seems to constitute a zone of infra-darkness, women accelerate the race to not just the ‘bottom’ in terms of wages; they take us into a more controlled, shrouded realm. To exercise agency becomes ‘masculine’ and thus the rules of ‘legitimacy’ are gendered.

The need for more and more vulnerable workers and the conditions of hard work where overtime is the rule rather than the exception have led to a highly feminized workforce in Bangladesh as well. The threat of deportation does not exist here, but one of the justifications for not taking away GSP or destroying the industry for its famous statistics does include the hidden threat of laid-off workers descending into the ‘blacker’ market, i.e. prostitution. Unlike the Maurituan girls who made some extra cash, the girls rarely choose another job outside the garments trade (it is, first of all, all-consuming); they live or die with it; and we all know what kind of death has merged with the atrocity of survival….

The garments industry in Bangladesh, composed of largely rural migrants, is often cited as a more empowering, if low-skilled, over-worked alternative to other ‘feminine’ alternatives, simply for the independence that free-wage labour provides. We don’t have to quote Marx on free wage labour to sense the irony in such a process of empowerment where feminization–with its corollaries of unprotesting and thus exhilaratingly cheap labour based on informal contracts with unwritten rights–and globalization are the twin processes that even allow such ‘empowerment’ to unfold.

But the atmosphere in the ‘90s was eerily hopeful. In 2001 Naila Kabeer quoted the Director of the Labour Department of Bangladesh saying, “I believe that the ‘culture of compliance’ is far ahead in the garment manufacturing sector and changes in the RMG sector are dramatic compared to other sectors.” Discussing ‘Resources, Rights and the Politics of Accountability,’ she echoes the sentiments from a national workshop: “The women workers in the Bangladesh garment industry have had more public attention to their rights than any group of workers in the entire history of the country.”

The atrocity of exhibition? 2009. One hungry (or should we say ‘weak’) state accused another. ..

Forgeries…identity.

‘Shob kichu bhua.’ Sumaya.

She is hungry, but she can’t eat. She eats, but the tumor blocking her nose, bloating and bursting through her eyes, takes a shot at grinding her down its root canal first. Dark there, unreal, like some impossible Rana Plaza.

And she tells me, ‘Waking up darkness, going to sleep darkness… everything looks the same. Kotha bolte khub iche kore…’ Yes, the ability to bear monotony– that was her ‘skill’, the monotony that now is the fruit of her labour. PG Hospital. Have a Look. It’s the Elephant Man. (And I can promise you, you would wish you were blind).

There has been no health research on how the garments industry has gradually, over time, eroded the strength and immunity of teenagers who began their gender-empowered career young, at fourteen perhaps like Sumaya, who is too thin, too weak, to support an operation to alleviate even an hour’s itch from the tumor bursting through her skin that cannot hold the stretched, dangling eye (indescribable, without morphine).

Even if the PM and all the foreign and domestic funds in the world were channeled somehow, magically, to her, she has already been so ‘feminized’, so ‘nimble,’ such an exemplary example of push-pull and supply and demand, that the process begun could never be reversed; damage done; poshai hojom, kaj kothom. But let’s get back to patriarchy, all that intangible subversion of dignity; how does it work when capital becomes the mid-wife, between the Man and the fruit.

Shob bhua. Two graves for one person. Can’t Match DNA.

It’s International Woman’s Day soon and hundreds– or should I say –billions of women’s rights’ NGOs and activists affiliated with OBR (One Billion Rising) or not will, umm…. RISE.

Sumaya will try to sleep.

Naomi Klein wrote in ‘Patriarchy gets Funky’ (2001) on how the culture industries made identity politics and diversity a mantra of global capital. She quotes cultural critic Richard Goldstein, “This revolution…turned out to be the savior of late capitalism.”

Pedagogy of the Oppressed. A handful of definitions. Sumaya, were you a student of mine, I would have asked you to teach me:

Patriarchy/Peri-ousia– Ousia in ancient Greek refers to one’s being or essence. Peri-ousia is that which surrounds one’s essential being and thus defines “who” one “is.” Patriarchy can be seen as a system of male domination in which men dominate women through the control of female sexuality or a system which developed along with the development of private property and state power. Or, it can be seen as both system and discourse.

Discourse— a regulated set of statements which combine with others in predictable ways. Foucault says: ‘We must conceive of discourse as a violence which we do to things, or in any case as a practice which we impose upon them; and it is in this practice that the events of discourse find the principle of their regularity.”

Then I would have told her, run after these words, kill them if you can. Burn them alive. In your body, the body arrested. In the body, the body bearing. In the body, the body unbearable.

She does not know how hysterical we get over Rights, she wants to eat ice cream and see again. She has decided my hands are softer than Shobuj’s; I don’t tell her no, mine are not nimble hands; don’t scold Shobuj, he loves you as though you were the last thing he would ever see with both eyes still able to shut and open.

Was it like a root canal, Rana Plaza? Well, what’s fire like anyway? Metaphors and similes were lost to Saydia when she tried to relay her experiences to me. Now that Sumaya has become an installation carved into her own skull, such literary devices seem unnecessary. Yes, the poets keep poetically describing the sky. And what exactly does your sky look like, Bangladesh? Looks like Boi Mela, February. Mela? Kothai Mela, Sumaya is almost excited, an excitement that wants to ‘see’ vicariously what else submerges us while she floats in the slow sure nausea of a malignant ‘pregnancy’ ‘without a due date.

Yeah, Boi Mela. You know, fun and games, books. Saris and panjabis. Very poetic poetry, poetically recited through reciting voices in recorded tapes, broken record invoking the beauty of our mother tongue… Well the language laboring between us in PG seems to be of another world; beyond Bangla. It’s all very otherworldly down there, in PG, cave-like; she yearns to speak but our tongues are gone.

There were men diseased who looked like lepers in New Market when I was a child. They’re not quite there anymore. I had hoped that along with ‘progressive’, ‘empowering,’ birth control and the garments industry they would have disappeared too, vodoo. Now I see that you Sumaya are the laboratory of the new leprosies. You’ve been kept in the dark, all winter they prepared for the celebrations of our liberated language, but you remained locked in ‘discourse’: ‘ultra poor,’ ‘ultra vulnerable,’ ‘slave-like conditions.’

Freed slave Sojourner Truth famously said, Ain’t I Woman? In the 1851 Womens Rights Convention in Ohio:

“And a’n’t I a woman? Look at me! Look at me! Look at my arm! I have ploughed, and planted, and gathered into barns, and no man could head me! And a’n’t I a woman? I have borne thirteen chilern, and seen ’em mos’ all sold off to slavery, and when I cried out with my mother’s grief, none but Jesus heard me! And a’n’t I a woman?”

Sojourner, how would you compensate that indomitable arm? They’ve been trying to work out some formula for the compensation of an arm or leg, head… Slavery must have easily measured up the pieces of your body, your teeth…It’s just so hyped, the hyperbole of ‘slavery=garments industry or slavery= women’s oppression.’ There is no heroism in Sojourner’s voice when she cries out ‘none but Jesus heard me!’ The echo there resounds because a deaf world is no world worthy of man or woman. Glorifying the strength of women is as equally patriarchal as denigrating their fortitude.

Given the immeasurable cause and effect of her affliction, it is difficult to conceive ‘compensation’ for Sumaya. But she seems to know everything about what Alice Walker connotes as strength when she advises: ‘Be Nobody’s Darling.’ Sumaya ain’t anyone’s darling.

Visitors to Sumaya like me whisper some recent news:

Hey you know Delwar’s in jail.

Good. His wife too…

Yes, she was culpable too, no? (Though the practice of marrying to avoid culpability is not unknown here).

Yeah. You know, ‘The Law.’ We made it bend a little towards the scales of justice. Justice, does that word have a ring, Sumaya?

Sumaya?

There is nothing I know or want in this world to beautify the horror you live,

I only want it to end.