The Farce In Bangladesh

 

Mohiuddin Khan Alamgir

I have written a lot recently about the human rights abuses and the lack of due process in Bangladesh under the current military regime. I have thrown numbers out such as 150,000 people behind bars without due process. However, sometimes numbers are hard to comprehend without a human face.

The military government, under the guise of an "anti-corruption drive", is purging the political class in Bangladesh. Leading political figures in the country are being rounded up on all sorts of charges. The military has created special "summary courts" to expeditiously try the "corrupt" politicians. The first to be tried is a long-time politician named Mohiuddin Khan Alamgir. Yesterday in the Washington Post, Nora Boustany wrote about his predicament. Today his son, Jalal Alamgir, who is an Assistant Professor of Political Science at the University of Massachusetts in Boston, wrote an op-ed in the Bangladeshi newspaper, The Daily Star. I am going to reprint the entire op-ed below because it is a necessary look behind the illusion of the "anti-corruption drive". Mr. Alamgir is charged with not fully disclosing his financial status when the military government demanded it earlier this year. He is charged with failing to disclose that he had a certificate of deposit in a Bangladeshi bank worth 1 crore taka. That amounts to $144,519 using today’s exchange rate of 69.195 taka to 1 US dollar. To put matters into some perspective, the military government has collected 270 crore taka (over $39 million) from 7 businessmen who had illegally acquired the funds. None of those businessmen are in jail.

Mr. Alamgir is not charged with illegally acquiring his modest savings; instead he is charged with failing to report that he had savings deposited in a well-known Bangladeshi bank – information that is readily available to the government. For that "crime", he is being held behind bars in solitary confinement, and without due process. According to the military government, the case against Mr. Alamgir is as follows:

ACC deputy directors (DD) Sharmin Ferdousi and Jibon Krishna Roy, the IOs of the case, submitted the charge sheet of the case filed against former state minister for planning Dr Mohiuddin Khan Alamgir with Tejgaon Police Station on March 6.

The IOs in the charge sheet said Alamgir committed a crime by not disclosing accurate financial information to both National Board of Revenue (NBR) and the ACC. The IOs said he did not mention his savings balance of Tk 1.17 crore in six fixed deposit accounts with IFIC Bank Karwan Bazar branch.

As you read the following op-ed, keep in mind that Mr. Alamgir’s story is but one of many such stories. The only reason we are hearing his story is because his son lives in the United States and has the freedom and the resources to speak out. Many others, ordinary citizens like Choles Ritchil, who have faced the brutality of this military have not lived to tell their tale.

The plot against MKA : A son’s protest
Jalal Alamgir

The much-publicized graft trials in summary courts have just begun. Who’s the first one being put on the stand? No, not someone who has embezzled millions from state coffers, nor one who has lived in inexplicable luxury and drives expensive European cars, nor one who has stolen relief materials meant for the poor.
The case that the government has prioritized is that of my father, Muhiuddin Khan Alamgir. And the official charge is that he had failed to disclose in his wealth statement fixed deposits held in IFIC Bank’s Karwan Bazar branch, amounting to around Tk 1 crore.

For the moment, leave aside the amount, which is tiny compared to the amounts implicated in corruption charges against others. Don’t inquire, for now, why the same government that is hunting down Dr. Alamgir has allowed seven businessmen to quietly return Tk 270 crores of "laundered money" and face no charges.

And don’t be bothered by the fact that the previous BNP government had left no stone unturned to find evidence of corruption against him, torturing him in 2002 and then persecuting him for the next five years, to no avail.

Just ask, where exactly is the corruption in this particular case?

Corruption implies abuse of power for private gain. Can a simple omission made in a financial statement by a 66-year old man, jailed in solitary confinement, be considered corruption, or even a crime, by any reasonable definition of the terms?

While in jail, my father was told to prepare and submit within 72 hours a statement detailing his life’s income and assets, or risk seizure of his property. He was denied access to any of his documents or to lawyers. He was kept in darkness from sundown to sunrise. Still, he wrote down an estimate spanning 40-plus years, as best as he could from memory.

Under these conditions, it’s simply impossible to be accurate, even for the most meticulous. But that’s precisely why the government created these conditions. It wants to generate these types of forced inconsistencies, so that it can have a pretext for convicting whomever it handpicks, pretending smugly that justice has been served.

And so prosecutors have gone to claim that my father’s omission indicates mala fide intent. I saw the draft statement he wrote; the poor man tried to calculate even tables of compound interest entirely by hand.

So I ask myself, do our leaders forget that people are not so easily fooled by their arguments? Even our ordinary wage-earning folk, like van drivers, fruit sellers, peons carrying files — they all know very well whose intent is malicious here.

They don’t speak, but their respectful salaams, their sympathetic nods, and their everyday acts of courtesy tell my father that they know his case is a farce. They willingly take risks that highbrow round-table talking heads won’t, and we get rewarded with an occasional letter, or if we are very lucky, a hushed one-minute phone call.

A few days ago, I spoke with my father for a minute, after three months. "Abba, shunte pachho (can you hear me?)," I asked.

He just managed, "Baba," and he choked up.

Then silence.

But through it I heard a deafening question: why this injustice again, why are they still after me?

People know. During a raid to our house, while one government agent declared in bravado: "Ponchash takar gormil peleo dhorbo (we’ll get you even if we find a fifty taka discrepancy)," another one sincerely apologized for what they were doing, but added that they had been ordered by higher ups to find something, anything, whatever it took.

The government’s first plot to frame Abba was "conspiracy against the state." A Bengali daily published parts of the hearing. The prosecutor was trying to convince the judge that Abba was conspiring at night, but the prosecutor failed to give answers to the judge’s repeated questions on what exactly he was conspiring.

"Are there witnesses? Is there proof?" The judge asked.

"Yes, we have all of that in a secret file," replied the Deputy Attorney General.

"Show me that file," demanded the Honorable Justice.

The prosecutor kept silent. Then, unable to show anything, he protested, "My Lord, we are in a state of emergency."

That, the prosecutor believed, trumped all arguments. But the High Court later dismissed the case as false.

Seeing that the High Court would not be easily convinced by fake charges, the government decided to bypass due process altogether; hence, we have a homegrown system of summary tribunals, extended right to detain, no right of bail, little scope of appeal, and lots of intimidation.

In that system, it became hard to find lawyers. Some politely refused, saying that they are scared to defend the accused, for the government would unleash its anger on them. Many journalists are scared too; we’ve all read about the press notes and the SMSes that the government has sent from time to time, barring them from carrying certain types of news.

Journalists were also barred entry to the courtroom on May 6, the day that the court took cognizance of my father’s case. The reason? Well, it’s anybody’s guess; maybe there were secret files with terrible truths that could not be made public.

All told, this is what the present courts are like, operating opaquely in a legal outback. With basic rights and due process dumped, and the watchful eye of the High Court sidelined, the government will try to ram its case through summary tribunals, and then put my father behind bars for crimes he did not commit.

The plot against MKA has the makings of a deliberate miscarriage of justice. It also portends a broader tragedy.

2,500 years ago the Greek playwright Aeschylus, the founder of tragedy, wrote famously: "In war, truth is the first casualty." The way the government is starting off by framing my father, it seems like our precious war on corruption will be no different.

And if you’re still unsure about mala fide intent or want to uncover a tragic "conspiracy against the state," this is where I suggest you look. After years of theft and abuse of power, our interest unquestionably is to secure justice, but some within the government are trampling the integrity of that effort by once again using it as a boxing arena to carry out their personal vendetta.

Next time I talk to Abba, whenever it may be, I will tell him, "They may hurt you now with their newfound muscle, but people know who is right. You’ll be able to tell by their salaams."

Jalal Alamgir is Assistant Professor of Political Science at the University of Massachusetts, Boston.

Update:  (via Drishtipat)

Jalal Alamgir has launched a website to help free his father. The site contains a wealth of background information, including the military government’s case against Mr. Alamgir. Here is information on how you can get involved to help free Mr. Alamgir. Please also help spread the word about this case. Information is the enemy of this military regime in Bangladesh. Help shine a light on what they would like to hide from the world.

The case against Mr. Alamgir would be comical if not for the fact that a man’s life hangs in the balance. It turns out that Mr. Alamgir did in fact report the certificates of deposit the military government charges him with concealing. They are claiming that he failed to properly estimate the value of the certificate of deposit when it will mature in the future. His estimate, from memory calculated from his jail cell, was off by 23%:

Dr. Alamgir prepared his financial statement under duress. He was asked to prepare and submit a wealth statement while in jail within 72 hours, or risk the seizure of his property. He had to prepare the statement with no access to any of his documents. He had to provide information, including 40+ years of income and assets, entirely from his memory. These conditions were created deliberately to generate inconsistencies, since it is not humanly possible to give an accurate account of one’s lifetime’s income and wealth under these circumstances.

Dr. Alamgir specifically mentioned fixed deposit (FDR) accounts. On page 3-5 of the statement furnished to ACC (Anti-Corruption Commision), specific mention was made about Sanchaya Patras and Amanat Patras (Bengali words for fixed deposit instruments). While in jail and without any bank documents, he estimated the value of his accounts to be around Tk. 9 million. ACC has charged that the value is Tk. 11.7 million. The discrepancy between a forced estimate produced by a prisoner in solitary confinement and a team of government accountants with all records in front of them comes to Tk. 2.7 million (approx. US $ 38,500) — hardly a grounds for corruption.

Corruption implies illegal income through theft or abuse of power. The accounts that the government are referring to have been in place for many years. This is regular banking information (not illegal accounts or offshore accounts or hidden accounts) that is available to the government. In addition, taxes have been paid from these accounts; there was nothing hidden or illegal about them. [Emphasis added by me.]

This is the third case brought against Mr. Alamgir by this military government. The first two cases were thrown out of court. This case, however, is being conducted under special tribunals created by the military government. Reality and common sense do not apply in these military tribunals.

The first case was dismissed by the Bangladesh High Court because the military had a hard time convincing a judge that having dinner with another person in one’s home constituted "treason".  The second case was dismissed by a district court because the court was unconvinced that Mr. Alamgir, along with 115 other defendants, were guilty of "extortion" on a small government road work contract worth $850. It was a further blow to the military when it was revealed that Mr. Alamgir last served in government in 2001 and the alleged "extortion" took place on January 5, 2007.

 

Posted in Bangladesh, Human Rights | 3 Comments

Chris Matthews On Iraq Policy

[Via Talking Points Memo]

This one is worth the price of admission.

Posted in Foreign Policy, Iraq, Media | 2 Comments

Follow His Lead

John Aravosis on CNN tonight was a must-see.

 

Posted in Foreign Policy, Iraq, Media | Comments Off on Follow His Lead

Former Bangladeshi PM Sheikh Hasina Returns Home

Sheikh Hasina's return

Former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina returned to Bangladesh today to cheering crowds after, under intense international and domestic pressure, the military reversed course in their attempt to exile her by banning her from the country.

The Associated Press reports:

Former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, who had been barred from returning to Bangladesh after she was accused of speaking against its military-backed interim government, arrived in the capital Monday, and thousands of supporters cheered, beat drums and sprinkled her with rosebuds.

"It’s my country; it’s my home. I’m so excited to be able to return to my country," Hasina said at Dhaka’s Zia International Airport after arriving from London. 

The government lifted a ban on Hasina’s return on April 25, seven days after it barred her homecoming amid media reports that the government wanted to exile her.

 Asked if she feared arrest, Hasina said the authorities "made a mistake in imposing the ban on my return. I don’t think they are going to repeat that mistake."

Senior aides of Hasina greeted her at the tightly guarded airport with flowers.

Thousands of other supporters, many of them beating drums, lined the streets as a bulletproof jeep drive Hasina to her residence in downtown Dhaka. 

 Hasina waved to the cheering crowd, which sprinkled her with rosebuds along the 10-mile journey.

The military had earlier tried to restrict people from meeting the returning ex-prime minister at the airport. The military had granted permission for only 10 people to meet her at the airport. However, people appeared to ignore the state of emergency by coming out onto the streets to greet her.

The stage is now set for a confrontation between the military and the political parties. The military has failed in its gambit to exile the two leaders of the country’s leading political parties. But I think it is unlikely that the military will now quietly return to the barracks. It is also not clear who is in control of the military. The general who was widely believed to have engineered the coup, General Moeen U Ahmed, has receded from public view – a sudden turn from his earlier very public statements claiming Bangladesh did not need "elective democracy". In another possible sign of confusion within the military, General Moeen’s anticipated official trip to India has apparently been called off – the army now denies any such trip was ever scheduled.

The situation in Bangladesh looks and feels like the period of coups and counter-coups in 1975. It has been widely reported that junior officers in the Bangladesh army, majors and colonels, had been intimidating the press recently – that in itself has echoes of 1975. However, the press in Bangladesh has begun to openly challenge this military government. The situation is ostensibly calm but highly unstable and fluid. As pressure builds on the military government to hold early elections and return the country to democracy, there is certain to be pushback from some quarters within the military.

The army now lacks an exit strategy. The results could be bloody.

 Update (via Schuchinta):

Below is Sheikh Hasina’s recent interview with Sir David Frost. Frost had interviewed her father, Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, in 1972 after Bangladesh became independent. Take a look at the woman that the Bangladesh military had declared a threat to national security.

Before her return, Sheikh Hasina was also interviewed by the Bangladeshi newspaper, New Age.

Update 2:

The Washington Post weighs in with an article on Hasina’s return to Bangladesh. The article also takes a skeptical view of the military’s "anti-corruption" drive and its promise to hold elections at the end of 2008.

 

Posted in Bangladesh, Human Rights | 2 Comments

The American Failure In Iraq

 

Failure in Iraq

 

The conversation in Washington is about the consequences of withdrawal. The Surgin’ General, David Petraeus, warns that an early withdrawal would lead to an "increase in sectarian violence". Small businessman and House Minority Leader John Boehner pleads for more time for the surge – he suggests we will see results in the "next three to four months." Ayman al-Zawahiri endorses President Bush’s strategy in Iraq. The White House sets the record straight by agreeing with al Qaeda that Iraq is the "central front of al Qaeda’s global campaign."

There is consensus between the Bush administration and al Qaeda that the United States should continue its fiasco in Iraq – but for different reasons. In Washington, there seems to be a general consensus that withdrawal from Iraq will have catastrophic consequences. On the one hand, this argument is used by the war advocates to justify prolonged involvement; while on the other hand, this argument causes the opponents of the war to mute their calls for withdrawal. Everyone wants to look tough and not lose their "national security" credentials by sounding weak. I am reminded of the same kind of group think that took place when the United States invaded Iraq in 2003.

A few days ago CNN posted an article on the front page of their web site with the blaring title "No safe way for the U.S. to leave Iraq, experts warn". Enter the fear mongering:

"Everyone wants the troops home — the Iraqis, the U.S., the world — but no one wants a precipitous withdrawal that produces a civil war, a bloodbath, nor a wider war in an unstable Mideast," Shepperd said, adding that the image of the United States was important too.

"And we do not want a U.S that is perceived as having been badly defeated in the global war on terror or as an unreliable future ally or coalition partner."

Shepperd said Iraq’s neighbors would be drawn into the all-out civil war likely if U.S. forces left too quickly. Iran could move in to further strengthen its influence in southern Iraq; Turkey likely would move against the Kurds in the north; and Saudi Arabia would be inclined to take action to protect Sunnis in western Iraq, he said.

The oil sector could also get hit hard, with Iran potentially mining the Persian Gulf and attempting to close the Straits of Hormuz, putting a stranglehold on oil flow, Shepperd says.

"Oil prices would skyrocket," he said — perhaps soaring from current prices of about $60 a barrel to more than $100 a barrel, with consequent rises at the gas pump.

And that could bring further trouble, Shepperd added. "Saudi Arabia will not allow increasing Iranian dominance to endanger its regime and oil economy."

On top of that, Iran could speed up its nuclear ambitions, causing a "daunting and depressing scenario" of a nuclear arms race in the Middle East with Saudi Arabia, Syria, Egypt and Turkey trying to get a nuclear bomb, Shepperd says.

The above is the "kitchen sink" argument. It is the same kind of argument used by Cheney, Rice, Bush and the rest to get us into Iraq. It is now being used to keep us in Iraq. It is Cheney’s "One Percent Doctrine" – but I like my phrase better.

I would like to put forward a different thesis. It is not a new thesis (I, as well as others, have made this case numerous times in the past). However, it is a view that has been pushed to the side since the so-called surge debate took control of Washington. In a sense, the "surge" has succeeded – it has succeeded politically in Washington by changing the nature of the debate. A cynic would say Americans and Iraqis are dying because the politicians in Washington are either trying to keep their drapes or measure for new ones.

Here is how I see it: The continued military presence of the United States in Iraq is creating the conditions for instability in the region. The nightmare scenario that everyone warns against if the U.S. withdraws becomes more likely the longer the United States remains in Iraq. The United States has been an enabler of ethnic cleansing in Iraq. Our presence has been the prime mover in tearing Iraqi societal structure apart. We have balkanized Iraq and continue to do so. Under our protection, rival forces in Iraq have armed themselves and organized under sectarian and tribal factions. We have introduced tools of ethnic cleansing, like the Baghdad Wall, to try to bring order to chaos. In doing so, we are underwriting the collapse of Iraqi society along ethnic lines.

The Bush Administration’s failure in Iraq has been comprehensive. Two million Iraqis have fled the country and now live as refugees, primarily in Syria and Jordan. Another two million have fled their homes and relocated along sectarian lines within Iraq. The United Nations estimates that about 50,000 Iraqis flee their homes every month in what has now become one of the biggest population shifts in recent times.

Iraq is a continuing tragedy. The massive death toll in Iraq continues to rise daily. The steady flood of refugees from Iraq continues to destabilize neighboring countries. Like it or not, Syria is already a party to the conflict – and it is not because terrorists are flooding Iraq from Syria, it is because refugees are flooding Syria from Iraq and overwhelming its economy. Chaos is being spread outward from Iraq.

The failure in Iraq is so immense that it becomes difficult to grasp its scope. Sometimes it helps to focus the mind by considering the barbarity at its most basic level. Consider the following story from Iraq tucked into a larger article about the Baghdad Wall as reported by the New York Times two weeks ago:

 

Mr. Maliki’s announcement came as sectarian violence continued across Iraq, with a horrific execution by Sunni Arabs in Mosul of 23 members of a small religious sect, known as Yezidis.

The Yezidis, who are most numerous in the Kurdistan region of northern Iraq, practice an offshoot of Islam that combines some Muslim teachings with those of ancient Persian religion.

But the most chilling attack was the one in Mosul. It followed the marriage in early April of a Sunni Arab man and a woman from the Yezidi faith, the police said.

The police said that when the woman married, she converted to Islam, which angered some of the Yezidis. She was kidnapped and as she was being brought back to her tribe, a crowd gathered and stoned her to death, said Brig. Gen. Muhammad al-Waqa of the Mosul police.

The Sunni Arabs in the area demanded that the Yezidis turn over the killers, and the police also put out a warrant for their arrest. In one Yezidi-majority town east of Mosul, residents found leaflets saying, ”Unless you turn them over, we will never let any Yezidi breathe the air.”

The Yezidis refused. On Sunday afternoon, armed men stopped minibuses traveling from a government textile factory in Mosul, where many Yezidis and Christians were known to work. The men dragged the passengers off the buses, checked their identity cards and lined the Yezidis up against a wall and shot them, killing 23 people and wounding three, General Waqa said.

Iraq is disintegrating. Our continuing presence furthers this disintegration. The Bush administration is responsible for creating and then enabling the chaos. Hanging one’s hat on a "surge" in Baghdad seems to miss the totality of the collapse that has been wrought on Iraq.

America will withdraw from Iraq, either now or sometime in the future – that much is certain. The strategic and moral question that faces the United States is this: Does remaining longer in Iraq help or hurt stability in Iraq, stability in the region, and American national security when the eventual pullout occurs? I think the answer is clear.

We can continue to listen to "experts" spin stories about the turning point coming in the "next three or four months" or after another Friedman Unit, or we can begin to prepare the ground for an orderly withdrawal. Just know that with each passing Friedman Unit, the inevitable withdrawal will leave a more unstable wake.

 

Posted in Foreign Policy, Human Rights, Iraq, Politics, Terrorism | 4 Comments