Nadeem Qadir
I think she needs to do more homework and assess the mood of Bangladeshis
Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina has rightly pointed out that the some powers and human rights organisations remain ignorant or dubiously silent when hundreds are being massacred in Gaza, but come down hard on internal matters of Bangladesh.
The major power is of course the United States of America. Readers must have noticed that Washington, which sided with Pakistan in 1971, has left no stone unturned in poking its nose in the internal affairs of Bangladesh, specially the January 5, 2014 general elections.
Even before her confirmation, the US ambassador-designate to Dhaka, Marcia Stephens Bloom Bernicat called the polls “flawed.” Making a statement before the Senate Foreign relations Committee on July 17, the ambassador-designate said: “The parliamentary elections of January 5 were undeniably flawed, and Bangladesh’s main political parties urgently need to engage in constructive dialogue that would lead to a more representative government.”
At the same time, she added, if confirmed, she would: “Passionately advocate policies that enshrine peaceful democratic values, including respect for human rights and diversity, room for civil society to flourish, space for the free and peaceful discussion of political differences unmarred by violence, and adherence to the rule of law by an independent judiciary.”
I will first analyse these parts of her statement and later go to another.
Bernicat did not say how it was “flawed.” If it is just because many were elected unopposed as BNP did not participate, then what could have been the alternative? To comply with a more democratic process, Sheikh Hasina tried to talk to Khaleda Zia, but it did not work.
The other option would have been to amend the constitution again. Can she give any example where a constitutional amendment was carried out by the powers for protecting its own democratic process?
The last option would have been a continuation of the brutal killings on the streets of not only political activists but also security personnel, who were mercilessly killed by BNP-Jamaat activists.
The prime minister has said the BNP has missed the polls train, and must wait until the next one is held. Now it is time for the BNP or the section of the civil society that follows it to come back to democratic ways to contest the next elections.
The people of Bangladesh will not give in to US’s ideas of a bloodbath – as it had allowed in 1971 and also now in Gaza – in the name of “flawless polls or peaceful democratic values.” She did, however, mention the phrase “peaceful … unmarred by violence,” referring to political violence. But she forgot to condemn the violence unleashed to derail the January 5 parliamentary polls.
Sheikh Hasina told a presser categorically that she: “Will not hold any dialogue with her [Khaleda] any more” and threw in a challenge to find out who scores how many goals in future politics.
When former President Jimmy Carter came to negotiate over political problems about the mode of elections, the two leaders spoke about exporting natural gas after talks with the US leader. I remember asking Carter why the issue of natural gas export was brought up when the real issue was democratic polls. But at that point, US interest may not have been in the polls.
The judiciary: Is it not independent? The chief justice may kindly take note of this, and the problems of lower courts in neighbouring democratic giant, India.
I am disheartened that the US ambassador-designate also indicated her reservations about the International War Crimes Tribunal by saying that the US supports “bringing to justice those who committed atrocities in the 1971 [Bangladesh Independence] war, but those trials should be fair and transparent, and in accordance with international standards.”
First, Washington did not support our liberation war, despite getting notes from its envoy in Dhaka about the brutalities being carried out by the Pakistani army, and the determination of Bangladeshis to fight for independence following a call by Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman. It remained silent during the nine-month massacre of men, women, and children. Now, it is questioning the trial of those accused of war crimes.
Foreign Secretary John Kerry’s telephone call to Sheikh Hasina seeking mercy for Quader Mollah is still in our minds. The court proceedings have been witnessed by many international experts and if it was a kangaroo court – all those in prison deserving to be hanged would have faced the gallows long before. Why this long process, because of which Sheikh Hasina had to face questions of “intentional delays”?
Last, but not the least, the United States continues advocating capital punishment for criminals, while protecting those condemned to death for killing Bangabandhu and his innocent family members.
The prime minister, in her presser, while answering a question, blasted Washington by saying: “This country is vocal on democracy and assesses elections with a scale to determine whether it is free, fair, or not. But on the other hand, they have given shelter to the [1975] killers.”
We would love to welcome the new US ambassador, but at the same time, I think she needs to do more homework and assess the mood of Bangladeshis. Let her take note that Ambassador Dan Mozena was criticised by many, including many of his colleagues in the diplomatic corps, for over-stepping his limits in interfering with Bangladesh’s internal affairs.
Source: Dhaka Tribune
The guy who wrote is an Awami League spokesperson. He writes on Dhaka Tribune quite often in support of his party.
No wonder. He must have been living in some other world, not in Bangladesh. What trash!
I am a bit confused – what is the message that this authour is trying give us? Is he justifying to tell us that Awami League’s 2014 election “win” has been a legitimate act and thus is outside the scope of further scrutiny or is he simply parroting the enforced PM Hasina’s position and thus criticizing the US Ambassador-designate to Bangladesh who made a certain observation about the 2014 Election, as an act of misstep in diplomacy?
All I can say is that he has done a miserable job of doing neither – it does not need an Abraham Lincoln to discover that 2014 election has not only been a grossly flawed and a treacherous event but a blot on the whole concept of democracy.
In terms of the statement made by the US Ambassador-designate, this self-styled expert in dimplomacy should have known that a foreign diplomat has every right to say whatever he or she wishes especially on issues that have ramifications for sustainability of two counytry’s relations. The Ambassador-designate had this minimum sense to figure out that relationship with a government that has no popular mandate and thus is not legitmate by any figment of imagination, is not good neither for her own country nor for the country that she has been designated to serve as her country’s Ambassador.
Finally I wish to highlight that while for a new newspaper such as the Dhaka Tribune it may not always be possible to find good people to write for it but that this does not mean that it has to fill its space with this kind of garbage which is not only factually grossly biased and unsubstantiated, is also badly written.
In case Dhaka Tribune (DT) is serious about continuing and growing, it should make extra efforts to find columnists that are credible and write objectively – last thing DT wants to see is vanish before it has even ventured properly.
Totally agree with ADK’s comments.
All of you are referring to Hasina as the Prime Minister. It is shameful for a nation to address an illegal usurper of power as the Prime Minister of Bangladesh that was on its way to democracy since August of 1975, and for last five years was being reversed to pre-1975 dictatorial rule deserving condemnation. Since January 5 so-called election, Hasina must not be recognized as the Prime Minister,So you know, any analysis involving Hasina as the Prime Minister has no meaning to me or any other freedom-loving Bangladeshi.We all need to ignore any news, reports or analysis supporting her or her illegal regime.