Banner Advertiser

Thursday, March 19, 2009

[ALOCHONA] Let's see any protest come from any investigation Team of BDR's killing

 
 the report int he above link says that some policy makers  from the present govt had meeting with the killers of BDR jawans before the 25-26 massacare. Some of the killers BDR jawans have agreed on the the invlovement of the policy makers in the BDR massacare.
 
 there were soem give and take among them.
 
 if we observe the handling  of the mutiny, including declaration  of general amnesty and   time given after declaration  , it seems that negotiatiors   were busy to help the killer  by allowing time so that they can complete their mission, killing of the army officers.
 
 
 I tend to beleive the report , I will have no confusion if  no investigation team protest of the report.


 
বিডিআরের খুনীদের পালানোর সুযোগ করে দেওয়া হলো  কেন ?  ফজলে নুর তাপস মাইকিং করে এলাকাবাসীকে সরে যেতে বলেছিলেন কেন?



__._,_.___


[Disclaimer: ALOCHONA Management is not liable for information contained in this message. The author takes full responsibility.]
To unsubscribe/subscribe, send request to alochona-owner@egroups.com




Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___

[mukto-mona] Reviewing Afghanistan

SAN-Feature Service

SOUTH ASIAN NEWS-FEATURE SERVICE

March 20,2009

 

Reviewing Afghanistan

Najmuddin A Shaikh

 

 There are sound reasons to be sceptical of the success of the new Afghan policy. But the one element in which we should and must cooperate is to recognise that the Afghan Taliban have ties with our own extremists

 

SAN-Feature Service: Reports in the American press indicate that President Barack Obama's administration is finalising its Afghanistan-Pakistan policy. The new policy is expected to be unveiled on the eve of the UN-sponsored meeting on Afghanistan in The Hague on March 31 or, latest, at the NATO summit meeting scheduled for April 3-4. Chances are that since the Obama administration has been stressing the need to evolve policy in consultation with allies, the Presidential Directive will come after these meetings have been held and some refinements made to reflect what has been debated at these two important consultative fora.

 

The "Afpak" policy's basic premises appear to be firstly a surge in the military effort. This means more US troops since the NATO allies are reluctant to commit any additional troops. Small accretions are expected from Germany but the caveats on the employment of most of the troops provided by NATO in combat zones in the South and East of the country will continue in place.

 

Of the few countries — the UK, Canada and the Netherlands — that are engaged in combat against the Taliban it is known that at least two, Netherlands and Canada, will end the military part of their mission in a couple of years. The 17,000 US troops that are to be deployed in the next couple of months will bring US troop levels in Afghanistan to about 50,000, far short of the 160,000 deployed in Iraq at the height of the surge.

 

This force will have a formidable list of tasks to perform: provide additional security needed for conducting the Afghan Presidential elections in August, fill the gaps left by the withdrawal of Canadian and Dutch troops and provide security in provinces that border on Kabul and have seen a surge of Taliban activity in recent months, provide the trainers needed for the expanded Afghan army which, some analysts are suggesting, has to be expanded well beyond the currently planned figure of 134,000 to about 250,000..

 

This last item is not as far as one can tell a recommendation made by any of the reviews but it appears to be part of the wish list of commanders on the ground who believe that this sort of strength would be required if the Afghan National Army is to be the key to the US exit strategy.

 

Theoretically these additional troops will make it possible to not only clear areas now under Taliban thrall but to hold them and thus create the security conditions in which economic development and political reconciliation can move forward. Even as most analysts involved in the review recognise the differences between largely urbanised Iraq and largely rural Afghanistan they hope the success of the surge in Iraq can be replicated in Afghanistan.

 

The second premise is that there has to be a new focus on political reconciliation and economic development. Biden's assertion that only 5% of the Taliban are hardcore and 70% are those who are with the Taliban because they provide employment is a clear indication that the new policy will aim to provide employment opportunities in the insurgency affected areas that will rival the financial inducements the Taliban are currently offering.

 

The key element will be the expansion of the PRTs (Provincial Reconstruction Teams). Despite the objections of the Karzai government, these PRTs will work with local representatives rather than with the Central government both in term of economic development and in giving the people the wherewithal to defend themselves against the Taliban.

 

The premise is that the success of these efforts would lay the ground work for winning over the 70% reconcilable Taliban and for negotiations with the 20% or so who could be persuaded with the right political inducements to join the peace process. Several hundred new positions have been created in the American embassy in Kabul to be filled by American diplomats along with specialists from other departments to undertake this economic development and probably to establish the quiet contacts needed to advance the reconciliation process.

 

The third premise is that the Karzai government can be cleansed of corrupt elements and can win the confidence of the Afghan people sufficiently for Kabul to be able to negotiate with the Taliban from a position of strength.

 

The Americans would be happy to accept that in these negotiations Karzai agrees that there will be a large measure of autonomy for the provinces and that so long as the Taliban undertake not to allow Al Qaeda or other terrorist organisations to operate in the areas that are under their control they could enforce their own system of government in these areas and enjoy a share of power in the central government.

 

The fourth and possibly the most important premise is what can be done in Pakistan. In addition to America's concern over the known groups operating in the NWFP and FATA, in the past two weeks, there have been a number of reports in the American press about the freedom with which the so-called Quetta Shura of the Taliban has been planning and executing operations in Afghanistan.

 

At a recent Congressional hearing questions on this subject elicited the response that the Pakistani authorities were concerned about local repercussions if they took action. Two days ago the New York Times reported that the Obama administration was considering the use of drones to attack the Taliban leadership in the areas around Quetta and in the refugee camps.

 

This was, however, contradicted in a Washington Post story a day later which said that the American military was reluctant to extend the drone attacks beyond the tribal areas and expected that the "Pakistan military must recognise the threat and organise themselves to deal with it".

 

The activities of the Taliban in the border areas of Balochistan therefore will now figure more prominently in American military and political calculations, the more so now that alongside the attack on the container terminal for NATO cargo in Peshawar there has also been an attack on trucks carrying NATO goods into Afghanistan from Chaman. The jeopardy this causes for the logistic support for NATO forces will not be easy to countenance.

 

In all likelihood, at the conferences scheduled on Afghanistan, the SCO conference in Moscow on March 27 and the March 31 conference in The Hague, Pakistan's representative will be asked to recognise the threat posed to Pakistan by the Taliban leadership in Quetta and its environs. But even more importantly, Pakistan will be asked to use its influence and its coercive powers to induce these leaders to seek reconciliation on the much more acceptable terms the Americans now seem to be offering.

 

The US could also likely use the leverage of the large scale aid that Pakistan is expecting both from the United States directly and, with US assistance, from the Friends of Pakistan, making it dependent on how successfully Pakistan tackles the Quetta Shura.

 

There are sound reasons for being sceptical about the success of the new Afghan policy. But the one element which we should recognise and must cooperate on is the fact that the Afghan Taliban, their protestations notwithstanding, have ties with our own extremists and that their presence on our soil represents as much of a danger to us as it does to the NATO forces in Afghanistan.-- SAN-Feature Service

 

The writer is a former foreign secretary of Pakistan

 




__._,_.___


****************************************************
Mukto Mona plans for a Grand Darwin Day Celebration: 
Call For Articles:

http://mukto-mona.com/wordpress/?p=68

http://mukto-mona.com/banga_blog/?p=585

****************************************************

VISIT MUKTO-MONA WEB-SITE : http://www.mukto-mona.com/

****************************************************

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it".
               -Beatrice Hall [pseudonym: S.G. Tallentyre], 190




Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___

[mukto-mona] The mind of Pakistan’s jihad

SAN-Feature Service

SOUTH ASIAN NEWS-FEATURE SERVICE

March 20,2009

 

The mind of Pakistan's jihad

Praveen Swami

 

Pakistan needs to dismantle not only the infrastructure of terror but also the ideas that built it. 

 

SAN-Feature Service : Not long before an assassin's bomb extinguished his life in 1989, Abdullah Yusuf Azzam authored his own requiem. "The flowing blood of innocent martyrs," Azzam wrote in The Signs of Allah, the Most Merciful, in the Jihad in Afghanistan, "and the scattering of corpses are all complementary to jihad. All these are the fuel of jihad and water for its garden."

 

Born in Palestine, Azzam's politics was shaped by his membership of Egypt's Islamic Jihad — an organisation devoted to overthrowing that country's secular state. He arrived in Pakistan in 1979, and founded the Maktab al-Khidmat (Office of Service). In time, the Maktab mentored thousands of West Asian jihadists — among them, Osama bin Laden.

 

Eight years later, Azzam teamed up with Hafiz Mohammad Saeed, a religious studies teacher in Islamabad whose family's experiences of Partition left him with an abiding hatred of Hindus and India. Together, the men set up the Markaz Dawat wal'Irshad, which gave birth to the Lashkar-e-Taiba. Azzam's significance, though, far transcends his role in the founding of the Lashkar: his ideas have become the keystone of a system of ideas that today threatens Pakistan itself.

 

For the most part, The Signs is a compendium of miracles: stories of men whose bodies were untouched by bullets which ripped apart their clothes and of birds that flew faster than the Soviet Union's supersonic jets to warn the mujahideen of imminent bombardment..

 

But Azzam also laid out his vision of the obligations of an Islamic state. "It is incumbent on the Islamic state," he stated, "to send out a group of mujahideen to their neighbouring infidel state. They should present Islam to the leader and his nation. If they refuse to accept Islam, jizyah [a tax] will be imposed upon them and they will become subjects of the Islamic state. If they refuse this second option, the third course of action is jihad to bring the infidel state under Islamic domination."

 

He argued that the Afghan jihad was ultimately unsuccessful because of the mujahideen's failure to create an Islamic state that could fulfil the jihadist imperative. "Instead of directing their guns at the infidels of India to liberate Kashmir, and at the Russians to liberate Tajikistan," he wrote, "they went at each other's throats in a genocidal power struggle for the remains of Kabul. They chose carrion over the Paradise of Kashmir, Tajikistan and Palestine."

 

In another book, Defence of the Muslim Lands, Azzam elaborated the same point: "The sin upon this present generation, for not advancing towards Afghanistan, Palestine, the Philippines, Kashmir, Lebanon, Chad, Eritrea, etc., is greater than the sin inherited from the loss of the lands which have previously fallen into the possession of the infidels.."

 

Lashkar ideologues, developing on Azzam's ideas, argued that the absence of an Islamic state meant jihad had become incumbent on individual Muslims. In an undated tract, Jihad in the Present Times, the Lashkar's Abdul Salaam bin-Muhammad argued that Muslims were in a "position of disgrace and slavery." It was therefore "binding and incumbent" upon them to fight until Islam became the dominant global order.

 

Azzam's influence on this world-view is evident. His intellectual heritage included the work of the seminal Islamist ideologue Sayyid Qutb — a member of Egypt's Society of the Muslim Brothers who was executed for his alleged role in an attempt to assassinate President Gamal Abdel Nasser.

 

Qutb's signal work, Milestones, cast Islam as being in implacable opposition to jahiliyyah, or ignorance. He sought to create "not a party of preachers and missionaries but rather of divine enforcers.." In Qutb's view, this "Muslim party has no choice but to go for and control the power centres for the simple reason that an oppressive immoral civilisation derives its sustenance from an immoral governmental set-up." The enemies included "hostile creeds such as communism and idolatry of all forms, whether in Russia, China, Yugoslavia, Albania, India, Kashmir, Ethiopia, Zanzibar, Cyprus, Kenya, South Africa or the United States."

 

We, the Mothers of Lashkar-e-Taiba, published by the Markaz's Dar-ul-Andalus press in 1998, tells us how the Lashkar set about fulfilling this obligation. It fought along with pro-Saudi Arabia Salafists against Soviet forces in Jaji and later joined battle in Jammu and Kashmir with fewer than "700 mujahideen ranged against 7,00,000 satanic forces." In an undated pamphlet, Why We Are Waging Jihad, bin-Muhammad promised that more was to follow: "Muslims ruled Andalusia for 800 years but they were finished to the last man. Christians now rule [Spain] and we must wrest it back from them. All of India, including Kashmir, Hyderabad, Assam, Nepal, Burma, Bihar and Junagarh were part of the Muslim empire that was lost because Muslims gave up jihad."

 

Lashkar ideologues legitimised their call for individuals to wage a jihad using Islamist cleric Fazal Illahi Vazirabadi's work. Vazirabadi fought along with the Pakistani irregulars who attacked Jammu and Kashmir in 1947. In a 1949 book, The Problem of the Kashmir Jihad, he argued that it was imperative for Muslims to wrest political control from non-Muslims. Vazirabadi's position was a response to Jamaat-e-Islami founder Sayyid Abul Ala Mawdudi's insistence that the state — not individuals — ought to be the agent of jihad. Mawdudi, like Vazirabadi, believed that it was "impossible for a Muslim to succeed in his aim of observing the Islamic pattern of life under the authority of a non-Islamic system of government.." However, Mawdudi believed that it was for the Pakistani state — not individual Muslims — to fight India's rule in Kashmir.

 

Battered by confrontations with the Pakistani state, historian Ayesha Jalal has recorded, Mawdudi "watered down his 'revolutionary' agenda." While "his enthusiasm for an armed jihad remained unabated," Mawdudi eventually "settled for a long secular trek toward the attainment of the Islamic state."

 

Others didn't: although the Lashkar saw the Pakistani state as a tactical ally, organisations like the Sipah-e-Sahiba, the Lashkar-e-Jhangvi and now the Taliban have engaged in murderous violence that threatens to tear apart that country.

 

Significant differences exist in the theological heritage of these groups — but a common intellectual vision unites and binds together their project with Jaish-e-Mohammad chief Mohammad Masood Azhar, who was released from an Indian jail in return for the safety of passengers on board a hijacked Indian Airlines flight, and claims theological legitimacy from the Deoband school of jurisprudence — a school at odds with the Jamiat Ahl-e-Hadith to which Saeed and the Lashkar owe allegiance.

 

But Azhar's ideas — outlined in The Struggle, The Gift of Virtue and The Virtues of Jihad — are almost indistinguishable from those of the Lashkar. Struggle was written, Azhar tells us, in the same mountains where Sayyid Ahmad of Rae Bareilly died in 1831 while waging an unsuccessful jihad against Maharaja Ranjit Singh's empire — a martyrdom to which the Jamiat Ahl-e-Hadith traces its formation. Following Qutb, Azhar argues that Islam faces an existential threat from modernity, much as followers of the Prophet Mohammad found themselves endangered by militarily more powerful pagan tribes. He reminds his audience that the Battle of Badr, where the Prophet defeated his adversaries, was won by 313 men pitted against armies of several thousands.

 

Like Azzam and his Lashkar protégés, Azhar uses the idiom of myth and miracle to draw cadre to the Jaish. His translation of a 13th century text by Ibn Nanhas, for example, provides a Jaish cadre a graphic account of the sensual benefits that await the mujahideen.

 

Many in the jihadist movement are now being drawn to a new generation of clerics who have been adroit in using television and the Internet to spread their message — figures like Anwar al-Awlaki, a Yemen-based cleric who was earlier chaplain at the George Washington University in the U.S..

 

In one pamphlet, 44 Ways to Support Jihad, al-Awlaki argues that in "times like these, when Muslim lands are occupied by the infidels, when the jails of tyrants are full of Muslim prisoners of war, when the rule of law of Allah is absent from this world, and when Islam is being attacked in order to uproot it, jihad becomes obligatory on every Muslim."

 

Among other things, al-Awlaki suggests that "if arms training is not possible in your country then it is worth the time and money to travel to another country to train."

 

Ever since the November 2008 Lashkar attack on Mumbai, Pakistan has faced growing global calls to dismantle the infrastructure of terror on its soil. It needs to do that — and also confront the ideas that brought about its construction in the first place.--SAN-Feature Service

  

Praveen Swami is senior journalist and analyst  of  the prestigious India newspaper THE HINDU.

 




__._,_.___


****************************************************
Mukto Mona plans for a Grand Darwin Day Celebration: 
Call For Articles:

http://mukto-mona.com/wordpress/?p=68

http://mukto-mona.com/banga_blog/?p=585

****************************************************

VISIT MUKTO-MONA WEB-SITE : http://www.mukto-mona.com/

****************************************************

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it".
               -Beatrice Hall [pseudonym: S.G. Tallentyre], 190




Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___

[ALOCHONA] Threat of direct intervention comes closer?

Threat of direct intervention comes closer?
 
It is no more a threat perception. Now it seems to have become a real threat - India desires to go for direct intervention to strengthen "the Hasina government, which has a pro-India tilt".

   The desire, as expressed by Indian foreign minister Pranab Mukharjee, has not provoked any response from Bangladesh foreign ministry. Could it be that the foreign office mandarins at Segunbagicha have conceded to the Indian intention?

   The March 16 issue of Indian news magazine Outlook quoted Pranab Mukharjee disclosing at a close-door meeting of Congress leaders at New Delhi's Mavalankar Hall as saying: "I had to go out of my way to issue a stern warning to those trying to the Sheikh Hasina government in Bangladesh that if they continue with their attempts, India would not sit idle".

   Does it portend a direct intervention in the internal affairs of Bangladesh? Is it a reminder of Sikkim annexation? No doubt, as a big neighbour, India has some genuine reasons to be concerned about the happenings in Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Pakistan or Nepal. But the experience of the peoples of neighbouring countries from the point of view of their stability, security and sovereignty has often been dangerous and destructive.
   
   Indian media
   Immediately after the BDR mutiny on February 24, some Indian media opted for provocation by linking certain political groups with Pakistani intelligence service. After the arrest of prime suspect Towhid, a Deputy Assistant Director of BDR, the Indian media was the first to give him identity as a "Shibir worker" and later as a "Jamaat worker" in spite of the fact that he joined BDR after completion of school final examination when Chhatra Shibir was not born in the country and Jamaat-e-Islami Bangladesh was not launched.

   Meanwhile, some Indian intellectuals and intelligence officials are engaged in a sustained campaign against Bangladesh. One of them, Hiranmay Karlekar, who branded Bangladesh as the next Afghanistan, made specific allegations against senior army officials by name.

   In an article in The Tribune ( March 3, 2008) he analysed Bangladesh Army Chief General Moeen's visit to India to make a comment that Bangladesh Army "has a chequered history of vicious internal conflicts".

   According to Karlekar, "General Moeen is not known to be hostile to India. However, Maj-Gen Syed Fatemi Ahmed Rumi, General Officer Commanding (GOC) of the 66th Division, who visited India with him, was known as a loyalist of Khaleda Zia, whose second tenure as Prime Minister"

   He further added: "Lt.-Gen. Jahangir Alam Khan Chowdhury, an India-hater known chiefly for his vicious verbal attacks on this country [India] made while he, then a Maj-General, was the Director-General of the Bangladesh Rifles." Karlekar also picked up rumours to identify Jamaat loyalists in the DGFI and the Army. He mentioned categorically that Brig-Gen A.T.M. Amin and Brig-Gen Chowdhury Fazlul Bari were close to the Jamaat-e-Islami Bangladesh (JeIB). He also pointed his finger at Lt Gen Mohammad Aminul Karim who was appointed Military Secretary to President Dr Iajuddin Ahmed.
   
   Sustained campaign
   Sustained campaign against Bangladesh may be traced in another article published in The Tribune on August 5, 2006. The writer of the article Selig S. Harrison, a former South Asia bureau chief of The Washington Post, identified "Jamaat inroads in the government security machinery at all levels, starting with Home Secretary Muhammad Omar Farooq, widely regarded as close to the Jamaat, have opened the way for suicide bombings, political assassinations, harassment of the Hindu minority, and an unchecked influx of funds from Islamic charities in Saudi Arabia and the Persian Gulf to Jamaat-oriented madrassas (religious schools) that in some cases are fronts for terrorist activity."

   The Tribune in its article, "Bangladesh-new hub for terrorism", continued further to describe the future prospects in Bangladesh thus: "...especially alarming is that the Jamaat and its allies appear to be penetrating the higher ranks of the armed forces". 

   Harrison like Hironmoy Karleker attributed Jamaat sympathies to Maj. Gen. Mohammed Aminul Karim, the then military secretary to President Iajuddin Ahmed, and to Brig. Gen. A.T.M. Amin, director of the Armed Forces Intelligence anti-terrorism bureau. Harrison' s article was published in The Washington Post on August 12, 2006 with a different headline "A New Hub for Terrorism? In Bangladesh, an Islamic Movement With Al-Qaeda Ties Is on the Rise"

   One can try to get the missing links now that Brigadier General Amin and Brigadier General Bari both have been removed from DGFI. This not to be confused with another Brigadier General Bari who was killed in BDR mutiny. The forced retirement of two generals - Maj Gen. Syed Fatemi Ahmed Rumi and Lt Gen Aminul Karim - also may also be linked to Indian desires as ventilated.
 



__._,_.___


[Disclaimer: ALOCHONA Management is not liable for information contained in this message. The author takes full responsibility.]
To unsubscribe/subscribe, send request to alochona-owner@egroups.com




Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___

[ALOCHONA] ‘The subcontinent is not at all secure’

'The subcontinent is not at all secure'

Saad Hammadi asks Professor Dalem Ch Barman, founder chairman of the Department of Peace and Conflict Studies at the Dhaka University about how the various security concerns revolving around South Asia will impact on the bilateral relations between neighbouring countries
 

photo byPrito Reza
What impact does the Pilkhana incident have for Bangladesh in terms of bilateral relations with South Asian countries?

   This is an internal matter. But since India shares common borders with us, it was concerned over BDR men crossing the border. Bilateral relation between countries is not likely to be affected by the mutiny. Our image however, to other countries has been hampered.

   To restore it, whoever is responsible behind the carnage, must be discovered through proper investigation and tried. A crisis of dependability within the state forces have emerged which must be re-established through mutual understanding.

   Considering the repeated terrorist attacks in Pakistan, the Mumbai attack in India and lately the terrorist attack on Sri Lankan cricketers, how secure is the subcontinent?

   The subcontinent is not at all secure. The terrorists are so committed to their tasks that even after getting caught, they do not regret their crime. Terrorists cannot be confined within a territory.

   Poverty, proper education and unemployment are the main reasons behind the insecurity and tension persisting in the subcontinent. A regional security is essential to tackle this situation so that neighbouring countries can also collectively address this situation.

   Many a time a national crisis in South Asia turns out to be 'blame game' between the countries. In an environment of mutual suspicion and unresolved issues, isn't a South Asian Task Force counter-productive?

   Call it mistrust or suspicion, both have always existed and yet the SAARC came to effect. I believe a task force is required so as to resolve such suspicion. An open dialogue between the leaders of South Asian countries may resolve the crisis. A common strategy may be developed and corrected as and when required. Problems cannot be avoided and for that, you must face reality.

   
Despite not being in power presently, religiously aligned political parties like Jamaat-e-Islami in Bangladesh, Bharatiya Janata Party in India and others in Pakistan, have grown in influence in the political arena of the subcontinent. In states of multiple cultures and religions where secular values are inevitable, what does their growth indicate?

   The religiously aligned parties continue to exist because of their affiliation with the society. If the 1972's constitution of Bangladesh was not revoked, secularism could have been exercised to its fullest. In democracy, you need secularism because they complement each other. Religion should not be used as a part of state mechanism.

   Prior to the 1972 constitution, capitalism was creating class discrimination. Religiously aligned parties were banned in the 1972 constitution when our religious force was found to have worked against liberation.

   In the subcontinent's perspective, be it in India or Pakistan, citizen's rights are a priority and therefore pluralism is essential. Religious influence may not be completely pulled out but if democracy can be established and practiced, religious identities would not become an instrument to discrimination.

   The global war on terror during the Bush administration has insinuated racial discrimination towards the entire Muslim population across the world. What effect does the global war on terror have on South Asia, the largest concentration of Muslim community in the world?

   Every state, as of today, is worried about its own security. If America is able to exercise democracy in the right mandate, the anti- Muslim attitude will perhaps simmer down.

   India has always displayed a hegemonic attitude toward neighbouring states. With obvious hegemonic intentions how can bilateral or multilateral relations flourish?

   I would not say India has a hegemonic attitude. Every state has its responsibilities to ensure its own security. Since the divide and rule during the British period, a level of distrust arose between the neighbouring countries.

   How are the intelligence agencies of our neighbouring countries a threat to us?

   I do not think there is a threat as such for us. When there is a question of image and the economies are at par between the neighbours, such threats may arise like there may be between Pakistan and India.

   Although Bangladesh and India have a water sharing agreement for the Ganges, there are none for the other 53 rivers that flow through the two countries. Water resource experts fear severe consequences if India goes ahead with plans to redirect its water from the North to the South.

   The concept of shared responsibility has become stronger between countries than earlier days. The troubles, if there is any, revolves around the bilateral context.

   Every state has its right to enjoy the benefits of common rivers. It is the responsibility of the states to discuss between the neighbours, so that everybody's right is ensured. The agreement must be monitored.

   For Bangladesh, a resolution on the water crises with India can be obtained through discussion and agreements. The authorities ought to be responsible enough to monitor the agreements.

   Bangladesh would definitely be affected in irrigation and drought if these agreements are not made. Because India comes in between Nepal and Bangladesh, we must resolve the matter with India.

   In a state of economic disparity between Bangladesh and India, how will we benefit from giving transit facilities to India?

   The reciprocal benefits are not always heeded by the bigger state, but nonetheless there should always be discussion from both sides before coming to a decision. Transit may be provided in a process that does not hamper Bangladesh's stability. There is already enough economic disparity, so transit may not flare the situation.

   The nuclear treaty between US and India was signed on the ground of reducing global demand for oil. Experts, however, fear that the Indian empowerment on nuclear equipments may trigger a nuclear arms race with Pakistan and China. What impact does the nuclear treaty have for other countries?

   There is hardly a chance of nuclear war to occur because any country to call it will have equal risk as its enemy. Even the nuclear experiments are being curtailed through Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty as it affects the environment. Nuclear weapons risk those who would use it as well. One of India's reasons to strengthen its nuclear resource is to establish itself as a regional power. And since a cold war between India and Pakistan continues to exist, nuclear resources give India an upper hand. India has primarily invested on nuclear resources to meet up for the huge energy crisis that is feared to occur in the future.

   How far is Pakistan's internal struggle related to the US invasion of Afghanistan?

   Outside of the Afghanistan war, Pakistan has always had internal trouble with regards to different ethnic communities. Also, the prolonged absence of democracy has not helped Pakistan. Yes, Pakistan may have been affected by the invasion and the tensions in the bordering regions, however, Pakistan also does not combat terrorism properly and allows terrorists to take refuge in the country.

   How do you view the Indian role in the LTTE war in Sri Lanka?

   It is assumed that since India has a Tamil community, as a regional power, India could take the struggle between LTTE and the Sri Lankan government to a constructive solution. As a mediator, like the way Norway tried, it could look into the demands of the state and LTTE, and out of a discussion, it could come to a solution. If the LTTE want a regional autonomy, it should be worked out by not hampering the state system.

   Has India's role in small neighbouring states always been so positive? For example, many have accused India of aggravating the internal trouble in countries like Sri Lanka and Nepal?

   To play the role of a mediator, neutrality is required. It depends on whether all sides accept India's mediatory role. Through SAARC's existence a lot of the misunderstandings can be resolved.

   It seems, in your words, India can do no wrong?

   It is not so. Every country has responsibility towards each other.
 



__._,_.___


[Disclaimer: ALOCHONA Management is not liable for information contained in this message. The author takes full responsibility.]
To unsubscribe/subscribe, send request to alochona-owner@egroups.com




Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___

[ALOCHONA] BDR CARNAGE PROBE :A command performance?

BDR CARNAGE PROBE :A command performance?
 
Hafiz Shamsheer
The cat is out of the bag. By recourse to what a daily newspaper described as hour-by-hour running commentary on the inquiry into the 25 - 26 February BDR butchery, retired Lieutenant Colonel Faruk Khan has come up with a brash revelation that investigators have found evidence of some JMB connections in it. In so doing, he has clearly mucked up the investigation and thus has done more harm to the nation than good. Why was he in such a hurry to sell some names to the media? Why didn't he let the investigation finish? Mysterious though, but nobody knows.
   Imposed as the chief coordinator of the two enquiry committees that are neutral and non-political per se, the politician commerce minister with a past military background has already put the cart before the horse. He has obliquely told all and sundry that they must forget about a neutral conclusion of the committees. Instead, they must expect a coordinated report that is tailored to the political expediency of the ruling party.
   
   Open to question
   More than 70 people died when rank-and-file border guards turned on their superiors, killing at least 56 senior army officers, during a 33-hour bloody revolt in Dhaka on February 25 and 26 last. The events shocked the entire nation because those killed were precious sons of the soil. Two teams of investigators are currently at work to unfold the causes of this brutal massacre, though the impartial frame of mind of the ones headed by a retired civilian bureaucrat is open to question.

   The insertion of a political coordinator, blessed by a political government to poke his snout into the investigation, is a half-baked farce commandeered by the ruling party whose primary aim, to put it mildly, lies far afield of full disclosure.
   
   No football match
   The committees are still halfway through their investigations into the February carnage. And any individual with minimum element of sanity will agree that the findings must be shrouded in confidentiality until they are finished. An investigation like this is no football match in the Bangabandhu stadium. Secrecy must be its essence. But the military officer-turned-politician, foisted in the task with a veiled party agenda, doesn't think so. He believes that the whole exercise of investigation must be a goldfish bowl with a line dictated by him, because that's where the interest of his party lies. And hence his daily - or hourly - expose the findings. It's a barefaced design to put words into the investigators' mouth, almost tantamount to forcing them to take the cue from his words.
   He said a week ago that the investigators had found clues of the involvement of Jumatul Mujahedeen Bangladesh (JMB) in the massacre.

   Nobody rules out the possibility of JMB involvement. By the same token, nobody yet agrees that JMB was really behind it, because the investigation report is not yet out. But why this rush on the part of Col Faruk? Who is pressurising him to be in such a hurry?
   
   Oblique caveat
   He repeated his assertion a week later and, to make it more juicy from his party's standpoint, said proofs of some civilians with links to JMB had also been found. Most political analysts perceive it as an oblique caveat, an attempt to fudge an honest and truthful investigation, and, if one may, to let the real culprits off the hook.

   Even his colleagues in the government, as well as the chief investigator, have publicly distanced themselves from Col Faruk's views. Both the LGRD Minister Syed Ashraful Islam and Law Minister Barrister Shafiq Ahmed have said it would be premature to point finger at anyone until the probes are complete. Chief Investigator Abdul Quahhar Akhond said nothing could be assumed on who was or were behind the carnage until the last piece of evidence was examined. In an enquiry like this, implications and ramifications may emerge at the last moment. And the last moment has not yet arrived.
   
   Partisan coordinator
   The analysts also question the need to have a coordinator at all, and that too in the person of a highly partisan politician. As many as five independent agencies conducted investigation into Mumbai massacre on 27 November 2008. But there was no coordinator, not to speak at all of a political coordinator.

   Three agencies - FEMA, NIST and FBI - worked separately to get to the bottom of the WTC collapse in New York on 11 September, 2001. But there was no coordinator, not to speak of a political coordinator. Neither was any politician involved in any of those investigations. The tasks were left entirely to the specialists. Why then do you need a coordinator unless the intention is to prejudice the investigation?
   
   Fudging the probe
   Analysts cite three reasons for the apparition of the political coordinator. The first is to fudge the investigation in a way that benefits the ruling party and to shield forces the government would not like to be implicated, although conjectures would not rule out their direct benefit from such attempted emasculation of Bangladesh military.
   The second is to keep the investigators away from the basic question of why the entire intelligence network failed? The third is perhaps to discourage the investigators from delving deep into some nitty-gritty of the 25 February incident. Why did Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina start negotiations with the rebels exactly at a time when the slaughter of the army officers was going on inside the BDR headquarters?
   
   Questions
   Why did the government not let the army follow its basic military manual and move in soon after the mutiny broke out? Who is the beneficiary of this decision? Why did the government allow more than 24 hours to let the rebels flee with arms and ammunitions and the properties they looted from the army officer's quarters? These are tough questions, and they will continue to beg answers for God knows how many light years. But the immediate job of the coordinator is to see that the investigators don't spend too much time on it.
   The fourth and the fifth aim of the coordination is perhaps most interesting. The fourth is to see if the entire incident could be exploited to catch some political rivals with charges of their involvement in the carnage. Should it succeed, the physical annihilation of the BNP and Jamaat will start. This is a great opportunity to bring the BAKSAL era back.
   
   Barmy politics
   The game plan is there. The blue print is there. On the question of whether it will ultimately work, only time can answer. The only fear is that the real culprits may go at large and come back with even more ferocious attacks if this welter of barmy politics is not at once dispensed with.
 



__._,_.___


[Disclaimer: ALOCHONA Management is not liable for information contained in this message. The author takes full responsibility.]
To unsubscribe/subscribe, send request to alochona-owner@egroups.com




Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___

[ALOCHONA] FW: [Sonar Bangladesh] who is radical anyway?

In bangla, the proverb says, "Mounota Shmmotir Lakkhon". For Muslims, this is something more than true. It is a fact that most muslims are not fanatic islamist radicals, rather peace loving people. But peace has to keep. It automatically does not remain in place. When a child does something wrong, the parents take appropriate actions to rectify. With the same token these peaceful muslims needed to strongly protest altogether against these criminal islamists. Did they do that? Certainly not. So, Who is responsible? People who are criticizing the islamic terrorists for their heinous actions or the peaceful muslims who are not protesting these heinous acts against the humanity in general. These problems are coming out of the muslim tent? So, it is the responsibility of the muslims to clean up this mess. Peace is not going to stay with the muslims if they do not attempt to keep it. My two cents.


To: dahuk@yahoogroups.com; witness-pioneer@yahoogroups.com; sonarbangladesh@yahoogroups.com; inquisitive_sisters@yahoogroups.com; ei_sumon@yahoo.com
From: mohebbollah@yahoo.com
Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2009 23:17:03 -0700
Subject: [Sonar Bangladesh] who is radical anyway?


MUHAMMED ÇETİN cetin.m@todayszaman.com Columnists
Who is radical anyway?

Last week the international magazine Newsweek featured a striking cover. The main headline was in Arabic with an English translation in smaller type below: "Radical Islam is a fact of life. How to live with it."

Today's interactive toolbox
Video Photo Audio
Send to print Send to my friend
Post your comments
Read comments
Fareed Zakaria's article and editorial argued that not all groups that find support in Muslim communities advocate jihadist ideologies and not all Muslim communities host terrorists -- in fact, most do not. The managing editor, Daniel Klaidman, also emphasizes: "We must be smart about distinguishing between true threats and irrational fears. What we need is more analysis and less anger." As he hints, different readers see such covers and topics in different ways -- deceptive with a twist, or menacing -- and the graceful Arabic calligraphy is beautiful, but commercially catchy, too. Such media analyses deserve attention in many respects.
While approaching issues related to Muslims or Islam, the naming and framing of issues is mostly erroneously misconstrued or used falsely and specific terms are used with ideological motives. For instance, many Muslims rightly object to the phrase "radical Islam" and refuse to accept or use it. Individuals or people can be radical, the interpretation of certain principles of a religion by some of its followers can be radical, but not the whole faith or religion itself. Expressions such as "radical Islam" imprint themselves and mold people's minds even before they start reading and thinking about the religion and Muslims.
This deepens communication problems. Any individual follower of a religion, male or female, can be radical, extremist or even terrorist, but not the religion. The term "Islamic terrorist" is used so often and in such a slack or even ill-intentioned way, whereas the media and politicians never refer to "Christian terror" or "Christian terrorists," or "Jewish terror" or "Jewish terrorists" or any other religion or faith, for that matter. At most they become "Christian rebels," "the far right" or some other dignified term, but never terrorists for their faith. The Lord's Resistance Army (LRA), which claims to be guided by the Bible's Ten Commandments, has wreaked havoc in the regions bordering Congo, Uganda and Sudan for two decades. The LRA is notorious for cutting off the limbs, lips, ears and throats of civilians, torture, executions, rape, forced displacement and forcing thousands of children to serve as soldiers or sex slaves.
A second issue is the visual imagery used to depict Muslims. While discussing violence and terrorism, the Western media use pictures of mosques, people praying or reading the Quran or innocent children and women in traditional clothing. Even as it argued against stereotyping Muslims, Newsweek's March 9 edition itself fell prey to this error: It showed children in traditional white gowns walking down the stairs of a modern mosque, young girls and women wearing headscarves at a university during Friday prayer and children reading the Quran in an underprivileged, remote area of a country. The reader is not brought to understand that these people have nothing to do with "nihilistic philosophies and expansionist aims," as the Newsweek editor put it. Instead, this associates all Muslims, man, woman and child, all their resources and institutions, the Quran, the mosque and their universities with fear; they are all seen as potential sources of radicalism, fundamentalism or ideological violence.
So even when people start with the right diagnosis of the issues, if they pursue the discussion with the wrong language and imagery, it does not help to resolve any ongoing dehumanizing of another group, especially of Muslims in this case.
The range of issues to confront, and they are many -- various sociopolitical and economic backgrounds, dysfunctional systems or regimes, disruption or disorientation of modernity in traditional societies, imposed cultural alienation, the negative effects of globalization, the role and weight of authoritarian regimes or militaries, media or judicial systems, transnational corporate and international agencies intervening or interfering with the domestic and international affairs of a country, regional conflicts and wars, the backlash produced by a colonial past or former or present foreign military interventions -- are all experienced and resolved differently in the varied and vast lands in which Muslim communities or societies live. So it is misleading to talk about "global Islamic insurgency." The different interests, issues and conflicts facing a particular society are represented by a range of political, ideological and sectarian groups. None of these stand for all Muslims, Islam or Islamic teachings, meanings and values. They are not part of a single global movement. Groups, motives, interests and movements are far more local or regional than that. They each have their own specific issues and grievances. Many do not have much in common in terms of tactics, strategies, reactions or positive responses. Thus, so-called radicalism, extremism or fundamentalism in various parts of the world cannot be resolved by bombing, killing, capturing, torturing, dehumanizing and demonizing individuals, people, communities or countries, as Newsweek also points out.
The problems are not the same in every society, and neither are the people. The same medicine cannot be used for all patients. As modern, educated and sophisticated people, we should demonstrate our political, moral, intellectual and spiritual superiority to extremists and radicals by sustaining civic, educational, philanthropic and altruistic efforts and projects. We need to bring people into our fold, not repel, stigmatize or compartmentalize them with artificial ideological labels. In the end, we have one world and one life to live. The world is not the property or responsibility of only a few.



.









See all the ways you can stay connected to friends and family

See all the ways you can stay connected to friends and family

Get news, entertainment and everything you care about at Live.com. Check it out!

See all the ways you can stay connected to friends and family

Get news, entertainment and everything you care about at Live.com. Check it out!

See all the ways you can stay connected to friends and family

check out the rest of the Windows Live™. More than mail–Windows Live™ goes way beyond your inbox. More than messages

__._,_.___


[Disclaimer: ALOCHONA Management is not liable for information contained in this message. The author takes full responsibility.]
To unsubscribe/subscribe, send request to alochona-owner@egroups.com




Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___