Plight of the General General Moeen's appearance at the helm of affairs after 1/11 had set off speculations to no end, and now his retirement seems to have generated an equal amount of interest A PROBE report General Moeen U Ahmed has retired. In his wake he has left a trail of controversy, criticism and unanswered questions. During his tenure as Army Chief, particularly during the two years of the last caretaker government, he received bouquets and brickbats from beneficiaries and victims respectively. And now he is undergoing a media postmortem sans mercy. In retrospect, there could have been two reasons behind the January 11, 2007 change in political scenario and the advent of the caretaker government. One was to put an immediate stop in the political bloodshed that had erupted and then to go for an election within three or four months under an interim caretaker government. The other was to stamp out the rampant corruption that had overtaken the nation over the years. Both the reasons behind 1/11 instilled a lot of expectations in the public mind. And with Gen. Moeen visibly in the driver's seat, the expectations were vested in him too. The expectations were not built up in a day. Transparency International Bangladesh (TIB) had already built up the grounds for people to rally against corruption and the corrupt as this was tarnishing the image of the nation globally. Political unrest had spiralled out of hand, the Awami League rally of lathi and boitha (sticks and poles) being the last straw. So when Moeen U Ahmed came as a knight in shining armour, he was seen by many as the saviour of the nation. The Fakhruddin government was to all appearances, a façade before this military man. Of course, there was a large degree of trepidation too, both within political circles and without. There were the democracy-lovers who would never court a military rule. And there were those who were skeptical of the outcome of such a government. The latter can now be heard singing out "we told you so!" in unison. If things were going wrong for the nation, General Moeen appeared on the scene as Mr. Fix-It. Unfortunately, things fell apart. Neither was the election held within three or four months as expected, nor was there a sustainable cure for corruption. Two years of caretaker machinations and it's back to Square One. There was a big hullabaloo about Minus Two during the caretaker regime. Analysts say that the caretakers could have held the election within about six months without the Minus Two exercise, something they couldn't even carry out to completion anyway. A lot of the blame for that is now being placed on Gen. Moeen's shoulders. It is being said that it was his political and personal ambitions that instigated the two-year stay at the helm. The two years of the army-backed caretaker government saw a lot of political experimenta-tion. Parties were broken and new parties emerged on the scene. When Moeen, at an important seminar in the city, gave broad "hints" that he would be joining politics, people rushed in a frenzy to join the bandwagon. The King's Party attracted politicians from all parties like moths to a flame. However, contrary to people's beliefs, Gen. Moeen did not join any political party nor did he make any direct inroad into politics. The party purported to be the King's Party turned out to be a damp squib and the new political parties proved their futility in the election results. The problem is that the 'reformists' were aided and abetted by Gen. Moeen to rebel against their parties and take up a political cleansing of kinds. But then he left them high and dry. The objective of 1/11 never materialised and these 'reformists' now find themselves castigated and ostracised in political circles. They have met their political death. Yet these were the relatively honest politicians, one's with integrity, who had hoped for a dawning of new politics. They are now out of the scene, with the old hands once again in the fray. This is a serious damage done to the political arena, something contrary to what 1/11 was supposed to be all about. Another damage that was brought about was in the people-army equation. The people of Bangladesh have always had tremendous respect for the army, deep-rooted confidence in the armed forces. In times of distress, man-made or otherwise, the armed forces have always stood by the people's side. This time too, when the country had turned into a cauldron of political unrest, the caretaker government was welcomed with open arms particularly because it was openly backed by the army. But have lingered on a mite too long, the people grew weary of the non-democratic rule. Had it delivered the goods, perhaps the two years would not have taken so long to pass. But as it turns out, the goods were not delivered, political reforms have not taken place and the country has not seen the much-hoped-for change in direction. And so people to a great degree have lost that confidence in the army. "As an institution," says a defence analyst, "the army has survived because of its second line of generals who are extraordinarily brilliant. The caretaker stint had dented its image badly and things only got worse with the BDR incident. But a handful of senior offices have managed to keep the institution's head above water." The question which is being asked now, particularly now that General Moeen has retired, is that if the General had been so keen on a new brand of democracy (Jago Bangladesh, et al), then why did he drop it all and let things slide back to where they had originally been? Was it lack of courage and conviction? Or what was it? Defence analysts feel that Moeen's error was not to take others on board. Normally in such situations, other generals are on the team, but in this instance, the caretaker government was run by a handful of army officers in the intelligence agencies. They played the game and played it close to their chests. Other senior generals within the army had no tangible role to play. Another step taken by General Moeen which is seen as a grave blunder is his authoring a book while still in service. Field Marshal Ayub Khan did this and so did General Pervez Musharraf. And then they both faced the same plight -- a topple from power. These books had strong elements of self-glorification. If pride goes before a fall, here was living proof and General Moeen succumbed to the same. On a more positive note, under Gen. Moeen's army, the National ID card and voter list project was carried out and has been relatively successful. But was this the objective of 1/11? Surely this could have been done as efficiently under army supervision without the radical turn of events that were brought about? Then again, this can be listed under "achievements", if one is to be fair. It was while General Moeen was at the helm of the army, with Awami League installed in power, when the BDR carnage took place. It was a blow to the army, particularly to the morale of the army. It was then they needed a leader to say, "I am with you." They were bold enough to question the authorities and look to their General, saying, "We are with you." But was he there for them? The answer is out there for all to see. When the BDR 'rebels' held a meeting with Hasina, General Moeen wasn't present there either. As this involved the army, his representation was deemed as most necessary, but he did not take the initiative to insist on his presence. This has irked quarters within the army and prompted questions among the public. Many see this as a command failure. The General has retired and people await his fate. Speculations have it that he will opt to go abroad rather than face the risk of retribution back home. One thing is clear, 1/11 may have come and gone as has General Moeen, but this is not the end. The book may have closed, but the story continues... http://probenewsmagazine.com/index.php?index=2&contentId=5313 |
__._,_.___