…for writing possibly the most relevant editorial for Bangladesh at the moment. Such is its great relevance that not even a single half-hearted sentence is offered as explanation as to how the American election will affect Bangladesh!

Not satisfied with just apeing the New York Times’ logo font, it seems that the Daily Star is in an uphill battle to become the NYT away from NYC. In Mr. Sobhan, they already have a bit of a Kristof, ready to swoop in on some “under-developed” area and explain to us – the real people – what goes on in there.

None of this would have mattered of course had there not been saturation coverage of a foreign election on the editorial page of a Bangladeshi newspaper. None of this would have mattered if that editorial on the state of press freedom that I asked for back in May had been published.

Apparently the state of press freedom is slightly less relevant than the American elections at the moment. Perhaps they know more about 1/11 than we do….

Please note, this is wholly a matter of taste. Unlike the Hannan op-ed issue, there is no right or wrong in this matter. But I believe it shows where priorities lie inside the Daily Star. Our priorities as citizens lie elsewhere: to remain informed about world affairs of course, but also to understand how it will ultimately affect us as Bangladeshi citizens.

I believe it really has become the time to unsubscribe to the Daily Star.

The country is restless. The incumbent is deemed corrupt. There floats about dark rumours of the incumbent’s family using their powerful relative’s name for personal gain. Extra-judicial killings are rife. The constitution has been used callously to ensure the incumbent’s grip on power, subverting the people’s mandate.

Then something extra-constitutional happens: self-appointed saviours with self-appointed mandates enter the picture.

Now depending on the details – 1975, 2007, Awami League, BNP, Sheikh Kamal, Tareq Rahman, BKSAL, rigged elections – what happens next is either bloody or bloodless (save a rumoured broken nose). That is a very important difference, especially to the families, friends and admirers of those who died on August 15^th, 1975. But leaving aside that important difference for the sake of analyzing events from a constitutional/political perspective, there are more similarities than dissimilarities: a bunch of appointed, armed bureaucrats deposed their elected civilian masters “for the sake of the people” on both these occasions.

Given the similarity, you would expect the wronged party of 2007 to have some sympathy for the wronged party of 1975. And vice versa.

You would, of course, be wrong.

Welcome to the bizarre world of AL-BNP “politics”. To the inhabitants of this world, these two sides are like night and day, white and black, Tom and Jerry, matter and anti-matter, Baker Bhai and the Kuttawali. Or to use their favourite false dichotomy – ahem – Mujib and Zia. All this speaks of a zero-sum mentality: i.e. a victory for one side is automatically the other’s defeat, the grief of the one is the other’s cause for jubilation. It’s classic zero-sum mentality, even though at this moment they are not involved in a zero-sum game.

Let them eat cake

As everyone knows by now, BNP celebrated Mrs. Zia’s “birthday” on August 15^th this year with the kind of pomp reserved for election wins. They did not do it privately as befits birthdays, fake ones included. They did not do it silently. While one part of our population grieves the murder of a pre-teenage boy and his sister-in-law with child among others, the other goes to Modhur Canteen to cut cake, to NAM apartments to cut cake and to the Central Jail to give gifts (and maybe throw cake through the bars?). In between licking icing from their lips, this latter half issues big speeches against the unconstitutionality of the current government and how they must free their leader.

We will call this second half of our population the irony-free, the supremely stupid or the supremely malicious.

For they seem gloriously ignorant that their cake-cutting-giving-throwing-licking validates the following:

1.       It is absolutely fine for the military to intervene in the nation’s politics if they deem it right.

2.       It is absolutely fine for the military to remove/neuter a sitting head of state they do not like.

3.       And therefore, 1/11, the day Khaleda Zia and Arafat Rahman were arrested are worthy of being celebrated through cake. (Chocolate cake of course since BNP seems to hand out vanilla.) Double chocolate for the first day Tareq complained of spine problems. I leave AL leaders to manufacture some personal milestones on those dates.

Forget the tastelessness of handing out cake on the day your political opponent’s family members were brutally murdered. I am not here to fault the BNP leadership’s taste (or lack thereof), but to criticize their lack of real political messages. The “politics” it is now practising is best described as “tribalism”.

Look, I’m from Dhaka. I know how it is. When I’m on a rickshaw, I swear at cars honking behind me. When I’m in a car, I swear at the rickshaws blocking my way. Dhaka is not a city made for empathy. So I’m not about to ask the current BNP leadership to put themselves in Sheikh Hasina’s shoes and consider how all this affects her. I do not expect empathy from them, and unlike others, I do not expect mature political judgement from Mrs. Zia who could have stopped these celebrations dead in their tracks years ago had she wanted.

I am going to appeal to BNP’s own self-interest to restrain from these celebrations of something or other on August 15^th. They may claim to celebrate a birthday, but anyone alive in Bangladesh through the 80s and 90s know the horror they actually celebrate.

Now, that horror has been perpetrated on them as well, slightly less horrifically. Maybe they cannot see it, but we onlookers can. And their celebrations make them seem either ignorant or hypocritical. I, for one, suspect them of being both.

The Irony of Being Naya Diganta – Part Deux

It did not stop with cake however. Naya Diganta on August 15^th and 16^th revealed the anti-Mujib consensus – and not some newly-minted birthday – that is really behind these celebrations.  

For those not familiar with Naya Diganta, it is the media flavour of the year for the BNP-JI or JI-BNP (as you please). Perusing this rag of a newspaper on those two days was like being back in the 80s and early 90s. The coverage and editorial pages on those two days revealed the old consensus that what happened on August 15^th was justified and not worthy of mourning. It cast quite a substantial shadow on the cakes, tainting them forever in my eyes.

In a move that put it one grade above BTV, Naya Diganta ran an article on “National Mourning Day” using the title “Bongobondhu”. That was the last good thing they did for the next 48 hours. Inside, on the editorial page, there was little mention or discussion of the tragedy. Fair enough. I do not believe in forcing people to mourn.

But was there really any need for an eulogy to Anwar Zahid at all? That too, on this day of all days? Even Weekly Holiday waited a week!

A Peking-ponthi Rajakar, Anwar Zahid had served as information minister under Ershad. Enough said I believe.

As with party activists, so with partisan media. Naya Diganta has a diminished sense of irony as we have previously discovered. The very next day, Mr. Farhad Mazhar was back expressing concern for Khaleda Zia and hoping she would enjoy it in jail.

I repeat, because this might take some time to sink in: the newspaper that cannot run a decent analysis of the events of August 15^th 1975, that publishes an eulogy for a collaborator against our state and then against our democracy is running an op-ed asking for a return to democracy and freedom for the head of the party of Bangladeshi nationalism.

(To add to the irony, above-mentioned dictator is now the lap-dog of the Awami League!)

বড়ই বিচিত্র আমাদের এই দেশ!

In all of this, I am really curious about Mr. Farhad Mazhar’s feelings on occupying the same editorial page a day after it played host to a eulogy for a Minister of Ershad. There’s consistency for you!

All this combined to make unpalatable this last page article about a seminar hosted in the city that called August 15^th “the inevitable historical outcome” of Mujib’s misgovernance. But as the report makes clear, these people had a substantially different view of 1/11. By itself I would not have complained about this article, since it is a valid piece of journalism. But seeing how 15^th August was covered by the newspaper, seeing how BNP went crazy for cake, and seeing how this newspaper is BNP-ponthi (mildly put), it was hard to treat this as anything but the anti-Mujib consensus that was in vogue throughout the 80s and the 90s.

The times they are a’changin’

This is an educated guess on my part, so I don’t have much to back this up other than anecdotal, sporadic evidence.

The consequences of BNP’s deliberate lack of respect towards Sheikh Mujib are two-fold. As already stated, it makes their criticism of 1/11 and their recent calls for democracy sound very, very hollow indeed. On another front, I believe that they have lost a part of the youth vote through their shenanigans. Maybe it will not show this year round, but it will show in the next decade (provided we actually hold elections!).

For somewhere in the last 7-8 years Sheikh Mujibur Rahman has metamorphosized from being an Awami League symbol to a national symbol. Not for everyone certainly. But in the eyes of a substantial part of those born since 1971, it seems to have happened.

There are a few factors at work behind this. For one, the anti-Mujib consensus has taken a battering thanks to the “Textbook Wars” and “Portrait Wars”. It made Generation-71 sit up and realize that perhaps we cannot trust the authorities to tell us the truth, that perhaps we had to find it ourselves. And Awami League had been “the authorities” for only 5 of the years since Sheikh Mujib’s demise.

There are two versions of the anti-Mujib consensus: the light version is summarised as “good leader, bad administrator”. The stronger/darker version is summarised as “he got what was coming to him”. The stronger version has all but disappeared, confined to the fringe elements.

If this change had taken place only in Awami League circles, I would not have been surprised. But rare is it to find the young BNP-ite who thinks similarly, and Tacit’s recent, much-appreciated uncategorical reply to a question I posed on this matter confirms that at least one BNP-leaning blogger feels that way.

 The truth is that the light anti-Mujib version does not stop BNP supporters and activists from supporting their party. The light-version does not stop the general public from paying him their respects even as they assess Mujib’s legacy critically.

The other factor at work is the media. For one, it has worked as a marketplace of competing ideas. Most importantly, it has allowed Awami Leaguers to fight against disinformation about Mujib. Even in the 80s/90s one could find the BNP leader, activist or supporter who spoke sensibly and respectfully about Mujib. The media has worked in disseminating their views on Mujib (very silently – say on a talk show, or the margins of a talk show) making it halal for BNP-ites to express their admiration of him.

For another, the media has worked as a barometer of popular feelings. Mujib sells. Which is why, on August 15^th, March 7^th and January 10^th between 2001-2006, while BTV remained silent under government pressure, the BNP-owned/leaning channels – such as NTV, RTV or Channel-1 – devoted substantial amounts of air-time or news-time to Sheikh Mujib. The market punishes those who do not cater to demand, you see.

Generation-71 was at most only 4-5 years old when Sheikh Mujib died. Most have no memories of him whatsoever. If you really think about it, people born in 1989-90 are eligible to vote this year. How relevant is Mujib’s alleged “misgovernance” to these folks? How important is Mujib as a figure around whom our nationalism coalesces despite differing political views? As Rumi bhai pointed out, we did not have to deal with this colossus of a man, so we are much more ready to see his achievements and forget the rest. And we are in the majority.

“একবার মরি, দু’বার মরি না”

There is no reason why this trend should continue. Awami League is more than capable of losing such goodwill towards them through over-selling and over-use of the Sheikh Mujib “brand” and through associating him in the public eye with every little policy mistake or big, Ershad-size ones, should they come to power. They can even damage his historical stature through their own over-adulation, their dynastic narrative and their own over-zealous propaganda. For instance, why is there so little mention of Bhashani or Suhrawardy on Awami League’s founding anniversary, except to push the dynastic narrative?

But the options for BNP are limited indeed. Khandoker Delwar Hossain, in between eating cake, told reporters that they have separate programs for National Mourning Day. Which prompts one to say: সেক্রেটারি শাব, নমুনা তো কিসুই দেখলাম না। Instead I saw cake, I saw one BNP-leaning outlet’s absolute silence and I saw a conference justifying murder. It has become high time for BNP to start distancing themselves from these little games, which in the end are consent, justification and celebration of what were simple and brutal murders. Humiliating your opponent might win you points in the gallery, but even the gallery knows better than to elect people who condone the murder of their own.

(This post is rated R for violence and strong language)

If, like most Bangladeshis of all political hues, you are completely invested in the worldview of Indians and Pakistanis, you will not be able to follow the line I am about to draw. If you are too busy licking up the ideological crumbs from the tables at Delhi, Islamabad or Riyadh, then you will deplore my “tasteless comments”. On the other hand, if you are a self-respecting Bangladeshi, whose first priority is the preservation of Bangladeshi lives, you might still be offended but you will see where I’m coming from.

Two things happened the past few weeks. Firstly, a freedom fighter was humiliated at a Jamaat-sponsored “Freedom Fighter’s” convention. Secondly, around 4-5 Bangladeshis were killed by the Indian border guards, who carry the very deceptive title of “Border Security Force”(BSF).

These two events are not unrelated.

The first event underscores once again our complete, callous lack of willingness to try those who killed Bangladeshi citizens – rich, poor, Hindus, Muslims, civilians and armed forces personnel – between 25th March 1971 and January 10th 1972. This sends a signal to the rest of the world that Bangladeshi life is cheap, that killing Bangladeshis is an action without consequences. As a result, when they need to or feel like it, the rest of the world indulges in this murderous little exercise. Thus our migrant workers are fucked with on a regular basis by foreign governments everywhere. But more relevant to the matter at hand, the BSF guns down Bangladeshis at will, knowing full well that the only consequence they have to face is some hot air. Lip service without action. Hot air is the only thing Bangladeshis know how to dish out.

We need to ensure that killing Bangladeshis – at the centre, the border or outside – by anyone becomes a very, very, very costly venture.

And what better way to start than by trying the murderers and rapists of 1971? I have one very bloody, absolutely essential and absolutely un-Islamic suggestion: execute all collaborators found guilty of murder, take their dead bodies to the most volatile border areas and leave them hanging there with a small note (in all 23 official languages of India) stating precisely what their crime was and why their dead bodies are hanging there.

No, I don’t think that is going to stop the BSF shooting, but it will let those fuckers know exactly what we do to those who kill our people.

Whew. Enough about that. On the margins of each event are little points of interest I wish to touch upon.

Among the participants at the Jamaat-sponsored “Freedom Fighters” Convention were one Mr. Mahmudur Rahman and Mr. Rezwan Siddiky, both columnists for Naya Diganta. That speaks volumes. (Mr. Mahmudur Rahman, should you choose to sue me, please note I am implying that you are a piece of shit who does not understand the very meaning of the word “sovereignty” that he uses in every other op-ed piece, not a Rajakar.)

But my focus is more on Rezwan Siddiky. Last time I was in the country, I read an article on foreign policy by Mr. Siddiky, and almost threw up. He was bemoaning the current government’s perceived alignment with India (which I myself am not too fond of). But what induced vomit was his criticism of the current government for not completing the sale of Rupali Bank to a Saudi prince (which I consider a security risk).

According to Mr. Siddiky, “Saudi Arabia has always been our friend through thick and thin. They have been for a long time.” Even if this wasn’t written 3 days before March 26th, it would beg the question, “Where were the Saudis during 1971”? Unless of course Mr. Siddiky doesn’t think that 1971 fits his definition of “বিপদ-আপদ”.

Sometimes, spotting a Jamaati from a mile away is as easy as smelling piss at the stadium during lunch on day 4 of a test match.

All I wish to do by way of this little dot-connecting exercise is illustrate where Jamaat’s clout comes from. Maybe this gives us an inkling as to what keeps these lovely, “furry” people out of jail. Also, a clue as to why Jamaatis are ready to denounce “Western” ways of capitalism, liberalism, over-consumption etc. but never the environmental degradation that comes from fossil fuel over-use. Just something to think about.

I’ll conclude by taking a moment to remind myself and readers that all those killed that week were people like you and me: they had parents, they had loved ones, moments in their lives filled with unexplainable joy, moments spent just staring at space over tea and moments when they despaired of doing anything with life. They lived far away from the glittering lights of Dhaka city, all of them trying to put food on (perhaps non-existent) tables, some in the uniform of the Bangladesh Rifles and some without. They were all born in this green land, and born with Hope, which this land quickly snuffs out.

Is it then too much to ask the government, the media and Dhakabashis to make as much noise for those of its fallen citizens out of uniform as it does for those who wear the armed forces’ clothing? The reaction and coverage of the death of civilians and armed forces personnel deserve equal force. Note: equal.

Daily Star Coverage of the BDR personnel killing:

Front page day 1

Editorial

1 of 3 articles on 20th July

Daily Star Coverage of a cattle trader’s killing

Gulf Times recap of the week says 4 civilians

BSF gunning down their own

Unfortunately, as many of you have figured out, my internet access is very limited at the moment and my time to blog is very limited indeed. So posts like this will unfortunately be the norm rather than the exception, about items that are of interest to me, but that I don’t have time to deal with at length.

Whither Central Bank Independence?

If a democratic polity hinges on an independent judiciary, then a free, prosperous economy hinges on an independent Central Bank, one that is supposed to look after the economy as a whole and not after the government’s fiscal interest.

Among bloggers, I think Saif@Addafication (whose lack of posts is a far greater loss to the Bangladeshi blogosphere than my current sojourn, but that’s another story) was the only one to have noticed it and asked us to keep an eye on it. Taking a cue from that post, I did try my best. Basically the Central Bank kept telling the commercial banks that their spread (difference between lending and deposit rates) were too high. Now that is basically the equivalent of the Potato-Eaters going around telling rice merchants that they are making too much profit.

Theoretically spreads/profits reflect the level of risk associated with any venture, and yes, in the real world that is not always the case. But while 99% of the population is dependent on the rice trade, how many are affected by the “spread”? Obviously there was something else at work here. Some of my friends mentioned that the big borrowers had gotten to Bangladesh Bank so they could refinance the loans they had taken out for bad investments.

Then the budget was announced and another angle came out. The government was going to be a big borrower this coming fiscal year. So why not pressure them to get the spread down and free up tax-money to spend towards other, worthier causes (say for instance, higher wages for civil servants? Trust me: the savings aren’t coming back to the people’s pockets through tax cuts or rebates!). Central Bank independence? There is none and with good reason. Only a capitalist pig, IMF-driven, seditious, unpatriotic and possibly yaba-smokin’ Indian Agent like me could want it.

Waiting for the Star (with pre-emptive apologies from the tone-deaf)

Just a small note to readers that it has been a month and a half since we were privileged to engage in this space, Mr. Zafar Sobhan, the Assistant Editor of the Daily Star in charge of the Op-Ed page and Forum. Mr. Sobhan had suggested that I or some other reader should pen a piece refuting the lick-spittle propaganda piece by one Abdul “we-are-wallowing-in-press-freedom-you-ingrates” Hannan. To which my suggestion was that they should either get a professional journalist to do it or re-publish Rahnuma Ahmed’s op-ed on the matter. Which may or may not have been fair, but I’ll leave that up to my readers to decide. I will just mention that in the month and a half since, they have failed to do either. In that month and a half the op-ed page carried a piece on the prospects of World Government (honestly, I’m laughing out loud as I write this, even though I know this isn’t funny… but World Government?) In that month and a half, the irrelevant coverage of the US elections continued on the Op-Ed page instead of the International Page where it belongs. Truly the Daily Star and I, a BANGLADESHI citizen, share different priorities at this point.

India-bashing

Transit, gas blocks, terrorism. Those are some pretty heavy issues to talk about with an allegedly interim government. India’s jaundiced views of BNP and their lack of diplomatic engagement with a democratically elected (if noxious, but that’s OUR call to make) BNP government are well known. With that in mind, India’s willingness to engage with an undemocratic government over some of the key issues in our bilateral relations really sends all the right signals to Bangladeshis. Lets just say that I, for one, will be a bit less patient when I hear my Indian friends or their politicians drone on about their lofty democratic ideals vis a vis their Evil Twin. It was never Gandhi’s India. Now it seems that it is not even Nehru’s India anymore. This is the post-Emergency, “Emerging Markets” India. USA-lite the South Asian version. Not good for us. Not good for friendly relations in the long term. On a side note, the most important issue – water – doesn’t seem to be on the agenda according to the reports I’ve seen.
(Since I started writing this, there have been more killings of Bangladeshis by the Indian Border Security Force. A separate post on that is forthcoming. Yes, within the week!)

Nizami gets bail

How does he do it? How does Jamaat do it? What magical powers do they have in an independent Bangladesh that they didn’t have in occupied Bangladesh in 1971? How do they manage to walk between the raindrops when it’s pouring like an unforgiving আষাঢ় day?
And how do the Utterly, Unquestioningly Patriotic Sector live with this outcome? Jyoti bhai tells me that Jamaat expressed disappointment at its own lack of following inside the Patriots’ Club. If so, then why are we seeing this? Are the hands of Most Disciplined Force tied?

Honestly, some answers would be good. My philosophy has always been to follow the money/arms trail. Who funds Jamaat? Not from the powerless inside, but from the powerful outside. Maybe that’s where we should be looking for answers.

I would like to end by mentioning a small, unnoticed punch to the nose of all anti-Hindu bigots out there. Alok Kapali’s century may have gone in vain, but it proves once again – if further proof were needed – where the loyalties of Hindu Bangladeshis lie. If only bigots relied on proof…

[Unfortunately, as many of you have figured out, my internet access is very limited at the moment and my time to blog is very limited indeed. So posts like this will unfortunately be the norm rather than the exception, about items that are of interest to me, but that I don’t have time to deal with at length. ]

A few months ago, you couldn’t visit a newspaper’s website or read a story without coming across Akbar Ali Khan, the bespectacled former advisor and current chairman of the Regulatory Reforms Commission. Indeed, he was starting to make pronouncements very close to what political parties were saying and that must have been terribly uncomfortable for this government. Indeed, what is the state of the RRC at the moment? Are we still keeping up that pretense of reform?

(Since I began writing this, there has been a news item that Mr. Khan has just returned from the U.S. after medical treatment. I still feel that this was a move to sideline/discipline him and would look out for any change in tune if/when he returns to the talk-show circuit. Reader help (all 5 of you!) in this is most welcome.)

The logical end to unbridled power invested unquestioningly in a single individual. The Ershad of the North one might call him.

So the obvious question to ask is this: are movie-critics in North Korea charged with “ruining the image of the Glorious country” by the nomenklatura or with “being counter-revolutionary” by Communist party apparatchiki, or with “disrespecting our Dear Leader who knows better” by the pathological bootlickers?

Yup. “Middle East” was always a colonial term, forever changing with the demands of the powerful. Nope, not about to use Arabic terms like al-Jazeera or Mashriq either.

1.O Palestine

I am not sure how many people saw this, but Vanity Fair recently had an interesting article where it said it had obtained documents showing American plans to supply Fatah with weapons so that they could “take out” Hamas. Having written about the Palestinian split last year, I thought I’d bring this to my readers’ attention. It would now appear that Hamas sensed the arms build-up and struck first. Just goes to show that arms do not solve domestic crises, simply breeds more insecurity.

I don’t know much American history, but rarely has there been an American President who got EVERYTHING wrong during his term in office.

Please note, Hamas won an election in the Territories, an election which the Bush administration pushed for, despite Fatah saying repeatedly that it wasn’t ready. In other words, the Bush administration does not even know how to press “selective” democracy properly. Yet another lost American art I suppose. After the election, having gotten a result they did not like, they tried to instigate a coup d’etat. Lesson for Bangladesh: true democracy is home-grown, not ambassador-delivered. On a related note: here’s Shirin Ebadi on her recent speaking tour through the US.

Moral of the story: Thou shalt not take American advice to take their arms to point at thine own countrymen. No, wait, I’m still thinking of Yahya’s Butchers in ‘71. My bad.

2. The Road to Damascus Leads Through Tehran

Turns out that last year’s mysterious Israeli airstrike inside Syria was indeed aimed at a nuclear facility, mimicking the attack on a similar Iraqi facility in the 80’s. The U.S. administration tried to establish links between Syria and the North Korean regime, saying they had actively helped each other with their nuclear programs. The Syrian Ambassador to the U.N. had a lovely reaction to that, which could be summarized as “Fool me once, shame on – shame on you. Fool me – you can’t get fooled again!”

The week after this news broke, the Israelis signaled that they were ready to talk to Syria about the status of the Golan Heights, which they took in the ’67 war. The Heights are of immense strategic value to both sides. What Israel expects in return is for Syria to stop supporting groups such as Hizb’Allah and to expel people like Khaled Meshaal, the head honcho of Hamas who’s holed up in Damascus (couldn’t resist the alliteration).

Now this is a bit of a pickle for Assad Junior, or AJ as I like to call him. While experts and post-Nasser Arab Nationalists talk about how Syria will “never abandon the Palestinians”, it is worth remembering that his father was a Machavellian “realist” who made and broke alliances at will, especially during the Lebanese Civil War. Towards the end of his rule, Hafez al-Assad would now and then exclaim that he wanted to retire and soak his feet in Lake Tiberius, which is part of the Golan, a clear signal to the Israelis that he was ready to talk about the area. (Hafez al-Assad was alive the last time these two sides spoke on the issue). I am not sure whether AJ is in any position to do so. For one, there is the increasing isolation of Syria following the Hariri assassination which led to a further alignment with Iran. Iran will most likely veto any attempt at peace, even if peace is in Syria’s own interest. As a result, I think they will be able to get Meshaal, but not cut out Iranian aid to Hizb’Allah. In any case, I really have no great hopes for peace in the region without Americans/Israelis talking (once again) to Iran.

And guess which American president presided over and partially caused Iran’s star to rise in the region?

3. Iraq Me, Dave Petraeus … Or Not

Sadly, Jon Stewart will not be able to use that song again.

Dave Petraeus has been promoted to U.S Central Command, which oversees the U.S. military operations not just in Iraq, but throughout North Africa, Southwest Asia and Central Asia. He is replacing William Fallon, who was known to have disagreed with the George “I Lissen to Mah Gen’rels” Bush administration on a number of key matters (Good thing Fallon was an Admiral, not a General. Otherwise I’d think Bush was some sort of hypocrite). In any case, both Afghanistan and – more ominously – Iran fall into Petraeus’ purview right now. We know him to be a student of famous insurgencies and how the Western Empires “dealt” with them. I hope he is enough of a student still to note the causal connections between how the “natives” were “dealt” with and the mess parts of the post-colonial world are in at the moment.

Somehow, not optimistic on that score. Would appreciate anyone else’s view on what difference this appointment might make.

April was a bad month for the Daily Star as far as I was concerned. (Read about that here and here). I honestly thought that was the lowest point they had reached and would bounce back.

Turns out I was wrong. They sunk even lower. The other day, as I scanned the Op-Ed page, I came across this gem of a piece on the state of press freedom in Bangladesh written by one Abdul Hannan, a freelance contributor. I do not know what Mr. Abdul Hannan’s line of work is, but researching press freedom is hopefully not it, because he is liable to be fired. Someone writing about press freedom in Bangladesh, in one of its highest circulated newspapers, is expected to know the fundamentals of the subject.

Moreover, the editors who let this go to print should ensure that there are no factual errors in the piece. There is one glaring error that underpins this entire write-up. In the fourth paragraph, the writer says:

“However, it is remarkable that now there is no curb on press freedom in Bangladesh, although the country has been under emergency rule since the present caretaker government assumed power in January last year. It is important to note that it is for the first time in Bangladesh that there has not been a single instance of victimization, persecution or harassment of journalists. It is unprecedented in a country under emergency rule.”

Mr. Hannan most likely reads the Daily Star. Which is why he seems particularly unaware of what Mr. Tasneem Khalil of the same newspaper went through last May. Which is why he does not know about Mr. Jahangir Alam Akash and his broken legs.

But surely the editors at this newspaper know what happened to their own colleague last May if not about Jahangir Alam Akash! That they let this falsehood go to print reflects very badly on them as people, but that is not my judgement to make.

Then there is the pot shot at the New Age. For those who missed it, Rahnuma Ahmed’s courageous piece on press censorship came out on Wednesday right after the editors’ meeting, led by Nurul Kabir earlier in the week.

What does Mr. Hannan have to say about all this? I draw your attention to the 7th paragraph:

“A section of the press, particularly a mainstream English daily in its editorial comments and columns has consistently engaged itself in scurrilous and vituperative attacks on every action and statement of the government in order to hold it up for ridicule, hatred and disrepute to deliberately create disaffection among the public against the government. In this context, the mild government reaction, by way of phone calls and press advice, is considered government intereference. If this is true, as alleged by editors and representatives of journalist associations recently, it can be better appreciated when viewed against the background of the generally continuing liberal attitude (sic) of the government towards the media.”

“Deliberately create disaffection among the public against the government”? Is this a Daily Star editorial or Matiur Rahman Nizami’s spokesman?

Phone calls are not government interference? I used to remember a certain editor who once held a stunningly different view about phone calls. Wonder what happened to him and his newspaper…

In any case, one cannot object to a change in a man’s heart or his newspaper’s editorial stance. What one can object to is the deliberate peddling of lies as the truth. This op-ed piece’s asserts “that there has not been a single instance of victimization, persecution or harassment” of journalists under the State of Emergency.

That is a falsehood.

We should correct them, and perhaps remind them of their erstwhile colleague. Below is a sample letter that I urge my readers to take two minutes out of their busy schedules to email to editor@thedailystar.net . I wish I had the knowhow to make an email form on my blog, but copy-paste will have to do for now.

———————————
Dear Editor,

In your May 25th, 2008 issue, the opinion piece titled “Freedom of the press” states that: “there has not been a single instance of victimization, persecution or harassment” since the current government came to power. This is factually incorrect.

There have been a number of cases of persecution and harassment of journalists. Two of the better known cases are those involving Mr. Jahangir Alam Akash of Rajshahi and Mr. Tasneem Khalil, a journalist affiliated with your newspaper. I find it surprising that I have to remind you of Mr. Khalil’s case. During the riots of last August, a number of journalists were arrested despite the government pledge that their press cards would work as curfew passes. Hardly the rosy picture painted by the columnist.

It is unfortunate that you decided to publish this piece without checking it for glaring errors such as those. We urge that you actually read newspapers other than yours – I would suggest the New Age – to remind yourself that what happens on the ground in reality is not restricted to what the Daily Star decides to acknowledge through its reporting.

Sincerely,
……….
————————————

There. Let’s see if the Daily Star publishes that. I was almost tempted to add: “and if you’re being held hostage by a bunch of people giving “press advice”, nod twice.” Somehow, I feel that would have given them too much credit.

I’m getting nostalgic this month because it has been slightly more than a year since I started blogging about Bangladeshi politics. A few days ago, I recalled my conversation about Ayub Khan last year with J@Shadakalo. We both agreed then that labeling Ayub a “Khan-ki Pola” – tempting as it was, and factual too, in both Bangla and Urdu – would be an insult to all children born into brothels everywhere. (I feel like I should explain that term, but I doubt that the 7-8 people who still read this blog will any problem deciphering it.)

Now I realize that even associating Ayub Khan and others of his ilk with prostitutes would be an insult to the latter. It all started earlier this month, in Big Daddy Kissinger’s country. Deborah Palfrey, the “D.C. Madam” as she was dubbed, committed suicide. She herself was a former prostitute before turning into a “Madam” – essentially a female pimp. Her clients – which include one “family values” Republican, David Vitter – continue to lead their lives and retain their jobs.

Yet, which of these two made the worse trade-off? Palfrey for selling her body? Or Vitter for selling his soul?

No, visiting a prostitute does not mean you have sold your soul. Not in my books. But Vitter is such a panderer that he stood for “family values” in public – values that he clearly did not act by – to get elected by a bunch of rednecks. Did Ayub Khan really care about the “integrity” of Pakistan on which his government brought the Agartala charges forward, while at the same time mouthing off about how every country needs a civil war? Of course not. He was just trying to sell himself to his “dear countrymen”.

Who deserves more condemnation? Ayub or the girl turning tricks at Ramna? Who gets more?
Major religions – both Ayub’s and Vitter’s – teaches you that this body is simply a shell and that the soul is all. Should that not also mean that the soul is more valuable than the body? Then why do religious leaders from both Christian and Islamic traditions judge those who sell their body so much more harshly than those who sell their soul? Less than a month after a bunch of bearded men made a taal out of a teel in front of Baitul Mukarram, the answer is on the wall. The infamous double-standard. Religion might make women and men equal, but (even religious) boys will be (testosterone-charged) boys. And in a boy’s eyes, a woman’s sex is so much more than anyone’s soul.

Religion was supposed to reverse that that sort of animalistic thinking, but you won’t have to look too hard among the religious to find defenders of insecurity-filled patriarchy. Ironic really.
Perhaps you do not believe in a God or any religion. Fine by me. You may care about people then (if not, God help a nihilist like you). Who has the greater effect on people’s welfare, a politician or a prostitute? Yet, have you ever seen the same kind of moral outrage over a politician’s pandering? A few months back, the media in our country jumped up and down on the couch screaming about a “Nikita” and darkly implying that she was running a prostitution ring. But at the same time, there were politicians (and bureaucrats, both civil and military) who were renouncing their life’s beliefs, all in the face of money, power and prestige.

Yet, what effect did Nikita really have on our lives?

And what effect will a new, servile class of politicians eager to sell their souls for those in power, what effect will that have on our lives?

But the double-standard sells newspapers you see. We can all be outraged at prostitutes and “fallen women” like Nikita without risking anything. Expressing outrage at politicos, who are in favour – a Hafiz, an Ibrahim or a Qureishi – comes with the risk of being hauled up by the “powers that be”. Yet, these latter have sold their souls, their beliefs to those who come offering them silver and gold.

Yet, we must condemn those who sell their bodies. Louder and louder.

Enough about Bangladeshi global social and moral hypocrisy. Can anyone tell me what the legal view of prostitution is in Bangladesh? Does the client get charged if caught? If so, is his (and it’s almost exclusively a “he”) punishment equal or less than the prostitute’s? I like the Swedish legal system’s take on this matter: make prostitution legal, but soliciting illegal. Thus, the entire legal liability hinges on the (almost exclusively male) customer rather than the (mostly female) seller. I am tempted to say that it will only be the Baitul Mukarram/Kakrail Mosque crowd who would oppose a move like that. But I know that such a statement would greatly understate the misogyny of the “secular” Bangladeshi middle/upper-classes.

The week of April 20th-26th, 2008 will not be remembered as the Daily Star’s finest. Now, I know there are some of you who never thought much of this paper, and I am not just referring to fringe elements. But the truth is that the Daily Star once did its job, that of holding government accountable and creating a space where government actions could be debated. It gave up that job a few months after 1/11 and this particular week of April it reached its lowest point yet.

The food price crisis is no doubt one of the most important issues for Bangladesh. Many solutions are floated, and the media as a whole is doing the nation a service by creating this marketplace of ideas. Recent Daily Star op-eds reflect this, in the number of editorial and op-ed columns they dedicate to this particular crisis. Which is laudable. However, a sudden flurry – three in the space of a week –of recent Daily Star op-eds seem to be focusing on the “potato solution” at the expense of other policy options (links at the end, feel free to add any I’ve missed) or even other topics.

First, let’s see what other topics they could have devoted those column inches to. How about the looming gas shortage? One piece in the same period from the ever reliable Abdul Bayes. How about the killings of Bangladeshis at the border by the BSF, which is a chronic problem? No pieces as usual.

Among the many solutions of the current food crisis, one is undoubtedly a change in the food habits of the people of this country. I would just like to get some acknowledgement from the Daily Star editorial team that – when compared with Open-Market Sales (short-term), currency devaluation (short-term)and increasing agricultural productivity (long-term) – this solution is also the hardest one to implement and the most ethically problematic.

In light of the problematic nature of this particular option, I would like to ask them why they have devoted as many as three op-eds in the space of a week to the glories of the potato, especially when the latter two are more or less superfluous.

Lastly, I would like to humbly suggest that they are abusing the public trust that they have earned during the last 10+ years.

The reason behind the sudden potato fascination is, of course, obvious. The same reason that “Prothom Bangladesh Amar Shesh Bangladesh” is played right after the National Anthem during BNP rule. The same reason that the March 7th Speech got played on BTV after AL’s ’96 win, but not on March 7th ‘91-‘96 or ‘01-‘06. The same reason why Bangladesh Betar became “Radio Bangladesh (sic)” in the middle. Nothing but the subservience of Reason and Truth before Power. And some good old spineless toshamodgiri. The timing speaks volumes.

People – from any walk of life – no longer trust BTV and Bangladesh Betar.

Is the Daily Star headed the same way?

(Methodological note: I have deliberately focused on the op-ed space because that is where the potato frenzy is at its height. While I am sure they have covered the gas crisis in the business section and the BSF killing in the news section, the editorial and “point-counterpoint” sections are reliable indicators as to what the editorial team thinks is important news. Clearly, potatoes were more important than gas crisis or Bangladeshis dying during this particular week!)

April 20

April 24

April 26

Letter in protest