[ALOCHONA] Farakka to Tipaimukh – Some facts that belie fiction

Farakka to Tipaimukh – Some facts that belie fiction By Habib Siddiqui   One would like to believe that as an elderly writer Dr. M.T. Hussain, who claims to have had a very close rapport with late Mr. B.M. Abbas, is better positioned to guide our younger generation on a complicated issue like India's construction of a hydroelectric dam at Tipaimukh. In the past, his articles have shown a penchant for demeaning everything Awami League (AL) – more like opposition for the sake of opposition, something that he may have learned quite well from his iconic leader – Mowlana Bhashani who was termed the "prophet of violence" by the Time magazine in 1969.[1]   If we were expecting something constructive this time, Dr. Hussain has disappointed us again. Like most of his articles, this one, too, is rich with rhetoric that outruns facts. It is loaded with accusations, mostly unfounded as we shall see below, against the AL leadership for the problem with the Farakka Barrage but short on substance offering meaningful solutions that we could have taken in the past and what our generation could do today with the latest threat of the proposed Tipaimukh Dam. He ought to know that his deplorable partisanship is counterproductive, let alone being silly, for a healthy and objective dialogue that we need have today on a plethora of issues that matter to Bangladesh. As the recent election in Bangladesh has adequately demonstrated, the new generation that is born after 1975 is not as narrow-minded, dwelling upon the old past but is more concerned about things that affect them presently.  As much as the days of political idolatry are absurd these days, politics for the sake of politics is equally insane!   Let's talk about facts and not fiction. Although the construction of the Farakka Barrage was completed during the Mujib rule in 1974-5, the decision to build this dam can be traced back to 1951. In those days, hydroelectric dams were popular methods to generating electric power. India, Pakistan, Nepal and Bhutan planned on building hundreds of hydropower dams from rivers that flowed down from the Himalayas. The Farakka dam was built to divert water from the Ganges River into the Hooghly River during the dry season (January to June), in order to flush out the accumulating silt which in the 1950s and 1960s was a problem at the major port of Kolkata on the Hooghly River. A series of negotiations between the Pakistani and Indian governments failed to persuade India into abandoning the Farakka project. The World Bank, the I.M.F and other international financial institutions financed the project.[2] So, one wonders how could Sk. Mujib be blamed for the Farakka Barrage!   After Bangladesh's independence the Indo-Bangladesh Joint Rivers Commission met over 90 times to discuss the Farakka Barrage issue, but without any results. The Bangladesh team was headed by Mr. B. M. Abbas. In April 1975, Bangladesh agreed to a trial operation of the Farakka Barrage for a period of 41 days from April 21 to May 31, 1975 to divert 11,000-16,000 cfs (cusecs) with the understanding that India will not operate feeder canal until a final agreement was reached between India and Bangladesh on the sharing of Ganges water. Bangladesh was assured of getting 40,000 cusecs during the dry season.   Unfortunately, soon after Sk. Mujib's death in August 15, 1975, taking advantage of the political change in Bangladesh, India violated the agreement (MOU) by cheating and diverting the full capacity of 40,000 cusecs unilaterally.. The matter was brought to the attention of U.N. General Assembly, which on November 26, 1976 adopted a consensus statement directing the parties to arrive at a fair and expeditious settlement. On November 5, 1977 the Ganges Waters Agreement was signed, assuring 34,500 cusecs for Bangladesh.[3] The five-year treaty expired in 1982 and after several shorter extensions lapsed entirely in 1989. The JRC statistics shows very clearly that Bangladesh did not get her due share during all those years (1977-91). There was no improvement of the situation during the first Khaleda Zia Administration (1991-96) with average water share reduced to 10,000 to 12,000 cusecs, with one extreme event of only 9,000 cusecs, during the dry season.[4]   After Sk. Hasina was elected Prime Minister, she visited India and signed a treaty with her counterpart Deve Gowda on Dec. 12, 1996.[5] The Treaty addressed the heart of the conflict: water allocation (35,000 cusecs) during the five months of the dry season (January-May – see the Table below). During the rest of the year, there is sufficient water that India can operate the Farakka diversion without creating problems for Bangladesh. The treaty stipulated that below a certain flow rate, India and Bangladesh will each share half of the water. Above a certain limit, Bangladesh will be guaranteed a certain minimum level, and if the water flow exceeds a given limit, India will withdraw a given amount, and the balance will be received by Bangladesh (which will be more than 50%).[6]   Period      Average          India's Share              BD's Share                flow             (cusecs)                   (cusecs)           1949-1988            (cusecs) Jan 1-10       107,516             40,000                     67,516 11-20      97,673              40,000                     57,673 21-31      90,154              40,000                     50,154 Feb 1-10       86,323              40,000                     46,323 11-20      82,839              40,000                     42,839 21-30      79,106              40,000                     39,106 March 1-10       74,419              39,419                     35,000 11-20      68,931              33,931                     35,000 21-31      64,688              35,000                     29,688 April 1-10       63,180              28,180                     35,000 11-20      62,633              35,000                     27,633 21-30      60,992              25,992                     35,000 May 1-10       67,251              35,000                     32,351 11-20      73,590              38,590                     35,000 21-31      81,834              40,000                     41,854  The statement of Mr. I.K. Gujral, External Affairs Minister in the Rajya Sabha on December 12, 1996 on the visit of Prime Minister of the People's Republic of Bangladesh to India and the signing of the treaty on the sharing of Ganges water at Farakka reads: "[D]uring the critical period within the lean season, i.e. from March 1 to May 10, India and Bangladesh each shall receive a guaranteed flow of 35,000 cusecs of water in an alternating sequence of three 10-day periods each. This is aimed at meeting the fundamental requirements of both our countries through a just and reasonable sharing of the burden of shortage. The Treaty also has the merit of being a long-term arrangement combined with scope for reviews at shorter intervals to study the impact of the sharing formula and to make needed adjustments. While the Treaty will be for 30 years and renewable on mutual consent, there is a provision of mandatory reviews at the end of 5 years and even earlier after 2 years with provisions for adjustments as required. Pending a fresh understanding after the review stage, Bangladesh would continue to receive 90% of its share in accordance with the new formula. We would thus avoid a situation where there is no agreement on the sharing of the Ganga waters between India and Bangladesh… As the House would recall, we have already taken initiatives in the commercial sphere by extending tariff concessions to Bangladesh on a range of products of export interest to them. We propose to extend commercial credits of Rs. 1 billion to enhance trade relations further."[7]   In the light of the above facts, it is difficult to sustain Dr. Hussain's statement that the 1996 Treaty went against the interest of Bangladesh, becoming a fait accompli. I have never heard an intelligent person say that a treaty signed with the aim of getting fair and equitable share is worse than not having one. Was the 1977-treaty silly, too? More outrageous is the implied assertion that the AL government that had ruled only five years in the post-Mujib era of 34 years is solely to be blamed for all the maladies facing Bangladesh today, including the Tipaimukh Dam, soon to be constructed by India.   It is true though that India had not kept her side of the bargain since signing of the treaty. The Joint River Commission (JRC) statistics, as quoted by Syful Islam in the New Nation, March 9, 2009, shows that in 1999 Bangladesh got 1,033 cusecs of water at Teesta barrage point against its normal requirements of 10,000 cusecs of water. After JRC meeting in 2000 the water flow rose to 4,530 cusecs, in January 2001 it reduced to 1406 cusecs, in January 2002 to 1,000 cusecs, in January 2003 to 1,100 cusecs, in November 2006 to 950 cusecs, in January 2007 to 525 cusecs and in January 2008 to 1,500 cusecs.[8]   India's behavior mimics those of Israel in dishonoring every treaty that the rogue state had signed with the Palestinian Authority. Should not she be ashamed of her iniquity?   Syful Islam mentions about a study conducted by the "International Rivers", a U.S.-based NGO that protects rivers and defends the rights of communities, which revealed that India had already built 74 dams, Nepal 15, Pakistan 6 and Bhutan 5 in the Himalayan region in the recent years. It also found that 37 Indian, 7 Pakistani and 2 Nepalese dams were under construction in that area. The study also identified that India had planned to build 318 dams, Nepal 37, Pakistan 35 and Bhutan 16 to add over 1,50,000 MW of additional electricity capacity in the next 20 years.[9] With 4,300 large dams already constructed and many more in the pipeline, India is one of the world's most prolific dam-builders.[10] India is committed to building more than 100 dams in eight states of the north-east corner alone..[11] If these numbers are true, what has Bangladesh government – past and present - done to stop India from such projects that are going to be built on international rivers harming Bangladesh?   Let's now look at Tipaimukh. Manipur needs about 140 MW of power to fulfill the unrestricted demand at the peak hours (1700 hrs to 2200 hrs). The total availability of power from all the Central Sector plants located in Assam, Meghalaya, Manipur, Nagaland and Tripura comes to around 105 MW.[12] The Tipaimukh Dam plan, built on the river Barak, which bifurcates into two streams as it enters Bangladesh as the rivers Surma and Kushiara, has been on the drawing board for nearly 40 years.[13] According to the implementing agency, North Eastern Electric Power Corporation (NEEPCO), this 390-meter-long, 163-meterhigh dam would have an installed capacity of 1,500 MW. As a multipurpose project, the dam also aims at flood moderation, improving navigation, irrigation and aquaculture in the region. Efforts were made in the past to get the World Bank or JBIC (a Japanese development bank) to back the project, but their involvement is still elusive.[14] It is costing India Rs. 6,800 crore — an escalation from the earlier estimated expenditure of Rs 5,163 crore. The foundation stone of the Tipaimukh project was laid by India's Union minister for industries and Cachar's representative in the Lok Sabha, Sontosh Mohan Dev, along with other central ministers, on December 16, 2006.[15] According to a Neepco source there, the work in January of 2007 mainly dealt with underground drilling at the reservoir site of the project. The Brahmaputra Board, a wing of the Union water resources ministry, drilled those sites in 1997. I want to know: what did the previous administrations in Bangladesh do about this dam?   No, I don't expect answers from Dr. Hussain, who is too cozy, too forgiving with non-AL governments that have ruled the country for most of the last 34 years. He imagines that just standing united will restrain India from constructing the Tipaimukh dam. He ought to know the futility of those long marches that Bhashani led against the Farakka Barrage in the mid-1970s. The very people targeted for drawing the benefits of the Tipaimukh dam living in the Manipur State had long been fighting a losing battle to stop this project. It is highly unlikely that demonstrations and protests inside Bangladesh would push India to abandon the project now, esp. after spending hundreds of crores of Rupees in front end loading (FEL) activities.   We have to be self-critical of our failure to bring world attention to the gargantuan harm that India's Farakka has brought upon Bangladesh. If we had succeeded in that endeavor, India today wouldn't be building the Tipaimukh dam. Whether we like it or not, we must realize that self-interest rules the day. In our world, there are no permanent friends or enemies. What is permanent is self-interest and that has to be pursued vigorously."[16]   At this stage, what actions and programs are meaningful for Bangladesh? As any rational person would tell us just protesting inside Bangladesh is not going to work. As a stronger party, India can afford to ignore such protests. Can India be persuaded to abandon dam projects on international rivers in favor of alternative options for energy need?[17] Given India's long history of dishonoring her agreements on Farakka with Bangladesh, can she be trusted for keeping any new promise? Are the UN and/or the ICJ only options Bangladesh has to redress her grievances?    [1] http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,844753,00.html [2] http://www.cyberbangladesh.org/disaster.html [3] http://www.cyberbangladesh.org/disaster.html [4] http://rezwanul.blogspot.com/2007/04/farakka-lost-battle-for-bangladesh.html [5] http://www.geocities.com/athens/academy/5772/treaty.html [6] http://rezwanul.blogspot.com/2007/04/farakka-lost-battle-for-bangladesh.html [7] http://www.indianembassy.org/policy/Foreign_Policy/ganga.htm [8] http://nation.ittefaq.com/issues/2009/03/09/news0711.htm [9] http://www.sos-arsenic..net/english/groundwater/waterbattle.html [10] http://internationalrivers.org/en/south-asia/india [11] http://internationalrivers.org/files/WRR.V20.N2.pdf [12] http://www.e-pao.net/epSubPageExtractor.asp?src=news_section.opinions.Opinion_on_Building_of_Tipaimukh_Dam.Q_A_Tipaimukh_Hydro-electric_Project_1 [13] http://www.sos-arsenic.net/english/groundwater/waterbattle.html [14] http://internationalrivers.org/files/WRR.V20.N2.pdf [15] http://www.telegraphindia.com/1070102/asp/northeast/story_7208477.asp [16] http://www.sos-arsenic.net/english/groundwater/respond.html; Barrister Harun ur Rashid, The Daily Star, January 05, 2005. [17] See this author's article offering an alternative recommendation for India: http://usa.mediamonitors.net/content/view/full/62938 --- On Thu, 6/4/09, bd_mailer@yahoo.com <bd_mailer@yahoo.com> wrote: From: bd_mailer@yahoo.com <bd_mailer@yahoo.com> Subject: India's Farakka Barrage to Tipaimukh: Bangladesh's Options To: "Dhaka Mails" <dhakamails@yahoogroups.com> Date: Thursday, June 4, 2009, 4:46 PM India's Farakka Barrage to Tipaimukh: Bangladesh's Options .M.T. Hussain   The unpalatable After getting nod of Bangladesh for the river Ganges' water withdrawal by India in May 1974 at the Farakka Barrage point up 17 kilometers of the common border of the two countries, and what is called at the downstream the Padma river of Bangladesh in the west, India has taken now to build two dams at Tipamukh and Fulertal in the east on the river Barak that forms upper riparian of the Kushiara, Surma and mighty Meghna rivers of Bangladesh. The evils of Farakka in the three and a half decades in the downstream incurred yearly losses in money term at 150,000 lakhs crores Taka and the incoming Eastern two are estimated to incur yearly loss for Bangladesh at Taka 225,000 lakhs crores. Farrakka Barrage adversely affected the western and southwestern territory of one third Bangladesh and the eastern two dams to affect one fourth of Bangladesh in the eastern area. My experience and some works On the Farakka Barrage issue I had my first book (India's Farakka Barrage… now out of print) published in 1996. I was then fortunate not only to have facts from documents of the Bangladesh Government source but also from other published documents about the issue here and elsewhere at the international level. I was also fortunate to have a very close rapport with the renowned hydrological expert B M Abbas during his last days before passing away in Dhaka, in addition to useful information I had from his authoritative book The Ganges Water Dispute. Just a few months back I had two articles, one in Bengali and the other in English on the same topic of Farakka losses incurred by Bangladesh that I took advantage of an occasion of follow up of a surface scratching by the BBC Bengali Radio discussion meeting held at Rajshahi a few months earlier on the effects of the India's Farakka Barrage in Bangladesh as the razzmatazz of the discussion had nothing of losses of Bangladesh in concrete terms of money figure. In the two articles mentioned and published in dailies in Dhaka I cited figures in specific calculated terms. The figure of Bangladesh losses for 33 years since May 1974, the time the Farakka went on in full commission to 2007 at nearly 49 lakhs crore Taka, that made yearly average of about one and a half lakh crore Taka. A research organization based in the USA and corroborated by a local organization in their calculation for likely losses of Bangladesh due to the India's Tipaimukh Dam would still be higher at over two lakhs crore Taka than the yearly average due to the Farakka, thus exceeding yearly average of about one lakh crore Taka losses that Bangladesh has been incurring due to the death trap of the Farakka Barrage. Miseries of millions on both sides Although there were groups against the Farakka project in West Bengal and Bihar before the barrage was erected, as one was renowned irrigation engineer Kapil Bannerjee (See weekly Holiday, 29 May 09), there are groups, as well, against the other two proposed dams. The Tipaimukh dam to be built at 500 meters downstream of the confluence of the Barak and Tuivai rivers is planned for generation of 1,500MW of hydro-electricity and the Fulertal one for irrigation purpose there in the Eastern India. The likely affected ones included common poor people as also objections raised by area experts, environmentalists, etc. Because, the Dam if erected and made operational is certain to affect lives and livings of many people engaged in agriculture in the project region, fisheries and fishing trade, river craft works and to adversely affect ecological balance that may even add to risks of bigger scale earth quakes in the region according to the noted earth science expert and famous geologist like Dr. Soibam Ibotombi, Professor of the Indian Manipur University International river rules and conventions International rivers are well designated so for that they flow through many countries. The Ganges and the Barak are international rivers. There are international rules and conventions that guide modes of sharing waters of such rivers between countries in the riparian regions. The upper riparian country, in particular, is not permitted by the rules and conventions to withdraw and divert water of any amount that would harm the lower riparian country/s. The 1997 UN convention adopted two key issues, one, in gist stated by two words, 'no harm' and the other 'equitable sharing'. To elaborate the implications of the two set of terms, one can safely state that the upper riparian country can do no harm to lower riparian country by withdrawing or diverting normal natural flow of water, and if any such withdrawal and diversion is at all to be done, such mode must have prior sanction of the lower riparian country subject to the condition of mutually agreed equitable sharing. There are examples of such water sharing treaties between countries like Egypt and Sudan for the Nile waters, Germany and Hungary for the Danube, Pakistan and India for the Sind just to cite as instances. The Ganges water dispute with India started about four decades ago, but unfortunately no equitable sharing agreement had been possible. In 1974 there had been a memorandum of understanding for 'experimental operation' of the Farakka Barrage by India for 'forty days' only. But that experimental forty days went on and on, India cared little for the lower riparian Bangladesh. During Presidennt Zia's time there had been two-year treaty first in 1977 for sharing water of the Ganges and renewed once only, but during President Ershad there had been no treaty at all. Instead the Indian Government suggested the then President Ershad to forget about making any water sharing treaty and advised him to dredge Bangladeshi part of lower riparian area of the rivers for storing bigger volumes of water. Such dredging action program is not only very costly but also a recurring and very expensive matter having no durable solution to the problem due to siltation of river beds for obstruction of flows in the upper riparian region. The 1996 agreement made by the then government for 30 years duration sealed the ill fate of Bangladesh, at least, until the expiry of the period of the unequal an inequitable treaty until 2026. 1996 humiliation I recall very clearly from a TV news item on the day in December 1996 how the 30-year treaty was undertaken by the then Sheikh Hasina during her visit to Kolakata and Delhi. The day previous to the treaty was signed in Delhi, Hasina not only met the West Bengal Chief Minister Jyoti Basu, but in her meet she fell on his feet to pay respect in somewhat Hindu style, Shashtyange Pronipat, and so pleased the Chief Minister blessed her as usual putting palm on her forehead and then made a brief remark that said that India would make a treaty for water sharing at the Farakka Barrage point for two to three years. Amazingly, the next day the treaty was signed for duration of 30 years and not for two or three years as Jyoti Bosu had predicted in blessing Hasina. India pitied Bangladesh If one would recall further back about the facts about 1974 MOU, 1977 water treaty for two years and renewed for another two years, no treaty whatsoever during the nine years term of Ershad and also none during the first term of Khaleda during 1991 to 1996 with the amazingly 30 year treaty made in December 1996 with P.M. Hasina that Bosu had predicted for a very short period. This treaty had no right standing so far as it did not meet international rules and conventions. Further that the treaty had no guarantee clause at all. These meant that the treaty went against the interest of lower riparian Bangladesh and violated international standard rules, conventions and norms. Thus it became a fait accompli that continues to harm Bangladesh, its ecology, economy and thus subservience to Delhi made in reality a mockery of sovereignty of Bangladesh. During the last 13 years it is the sad reality that India released for Bangladesh less quantities of water than Delhi had promised in the terms and schedule of the treaty; their excuse keeps on telling that they had no flow enough in the upper region and hence the lower quantum for Bangladesh became obvious. Aggravate further Having had the sad and painful experience due to India's Farakka Barrage being operated for the last 35 years, the Tipaimiukh dam has been floated to further aggravate the position of Bangladesh in this case in the eastern region involving one fourth of the much smaller and impoverished geographical area. Redress at the UN Being the Tipaimukh a life and death question for Banglkadesh, Bangladesh has to stand solidly united to restrain India to abandon the Tipaimukh dam project for good. But if she does not restrain on their own, Bangladesh has no option left to bring the matter in the knowledge of international bodies like the UN and the possibly into the International Court of Justice at the Hague for appropriate redress.

__._,_.___

[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] Re: [chottala.com] A trillion dollar question - has prothom-alu has changed

If it was news paper, then it would be neutral by default. In reality it is a views paper. Is there any army in the world that can win over 150 Millions people? Should we be afraid of any country?                                                                          --- On Fri, 6/5/09, Helal Ahmed <huahmed@yahoo.com> wrote: From: Helal Ahmed <huahmed@yahoo.com> Subject: Re: [chottala.com] A trillion dollar question - has prothom-alu has changed To: alochona@yahoogroups.com, chottala@yahoogroups.com, dahuk@yahoogroups.com, notun_bangladesh@yahoogroups.com, sonarbangladesh@yahoogroups.com, reform-bd@yahoogroups.com, "Amra Bangladesi" <amra-bangladesi@yahoogroups.com>, minimumneeds@yahoogroups.com, world_peace_movement@yahoogroups.com, tritiomatra@yahoogroups.com, history_islam@yahoogroups.com Cc: "Editor New" <newagebd@global-bd.net>, editor@amadershomoy.com, editor@prothom-alo.com, editor@thebangladeshtoday.com, editor@thedailystar.net, editor@thefinancialexpress-bd.com Date: Friday, June 5, 2009, 9:34 AM Dear Mr. Mahathir of BD:   Indeed it's a trillion dollar question. As a reader, I'm waiting to see Prothom-alo becoming a neutral newspaper in BD.   Let's wait and see.   Thnx. Helal --- On Fri, 6/5/09, Mahathir of BD <wouldbemahathirofbd @yahoo.com> wrote: From: Mahathir of BD <wouldbemahathirofbd @yahoo.com> Subject: [chottala.com] A trillion dollar question - has prothom-alu has changed To: alochona@yahoogroup s.com, chottala@yahoogroup s.com, dahuk@yahoogroups. com, notun_bangladesh@ yahoogroups. com, sonarbangladesh@ yahoogroups. com, reform-bd@yahoogrou ps.com, "Amra Bangladesi" <amra-bangladesi@ yahoogroups. com>, minimumneeds@ yahoogroups. com, world_peace_ movement@ yahoogroups. com, tritiomatra@ yahoogroups. com, history_islam@ yahoogroups. com Cc: "Editor New" <newagebd@global- bd.net>, editor@amadershomoy .com, editor@prothom- alo.com, editor@thebanglades htoday.com, editor@thedailystar .net, editor@thefinancial express-bd. com Date: Friday, June 5, 2009, 2:12 AM A trillion dollar question - has prothom-alu has changed  since it has started the slogan bodle dao, bodle jao?   Is there any army in the world that can win over 150 Millions people? Should we be afraid of any country?

__._,_.___

[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] President Barack Obama to the Muslims. Just a speech ?

President Barack Obama to the Muslims. Just a speech ?  Tariq Ramadan   Friday 5 June 2009 We are used to nice words and many, in the Muslim majority countries as well as Western Muslims, have ended up not trusting the United States when it comes to political discourse. They want actions and they are right. This is indeed what our world needs. Yet, President Obama, who is very eloquent and good at using symbols, has provided us with his speech in Cairo with something that is more than simple words. It is altogether an attitude, a mindset, a vision. In order to avoid shaping a binary vision of the world, Barack Obama referred to "America", "Islam", "the Muslims" and "the Muslim majority countries": he never fell into the trap of speaking about "us" as different or opposed to "them" and he was quick to refer Islam as being an American reality, and to the American Muslims as being an asset to his own society. Talking about his own life, he went from personal to universal stating that he knows by experience that Islam is a religion whose message is about openness and tolerance. Both the wording and the substance of his speech were important and new: he managed to be humble, self-critical, open and demanding at the same time in a message targeting all of "us", understood as "partners". The seven areas he highlighted are critical. One might disagree with President Obama's reading and interpretation of what is happening in Afghanistan, in Iraq and in Palestine (and the US role in these conflicts), but he has clearly avoided shying away from addressing these issues and has called all the parties to take their share of responsibility by putting an end to violence and promoting respect and justice. He clearly acknowledged the suffering of the Palestinians and their rights to get a viable and independent State. It is a first necessary step: the future will tell us if the new President has the means to be strong and consistent when dealing with the Israeli government. He left opened some channels as to the dialogue with both the Palestinian authority (calling for unity without sidelining Hamas) and Iran. These were and remain critical issues and there will be no future without addressing them with consistency and courage. Expectations are immense and the Barack Obama has still to show his true practical commitment to justice and peace.. President Obama made an important distinction between the democratic principles and the political models. Rule of law, free choice of the people, duty of transparency are universal principals while the political models are depending on historical and cultural factors to be taken into account. We hope the Obama administration would put this vision into practice by both promoting democratisation everywhere and scrupulously respecting the choice of the people: it would be good to start with Iraq and Afghanistan. As to the undisputable principals of democracy, this is a good reminder to be uttered... in Egypt, to the Egyptian Government, where the President was delivering his speech. Barack Obama mentioned seven issues to be addressed. He started by the more political issues and quite intelligently ended with the critical areas of "women" and "education". This is where, he recalled, we all have to do much better. In these two areas he came with practical solutions and presented future interesting projects. Facing economic crisis, doubts, fears, and global threats, the world needs the women to be more involved and education to be promoted everywhere. These commons challenges helped the President, once again, to talk about an inclusive us, a "new we" so to say, where we are partners sharing the same concerns, facing up to te similar challenges, exposed to common enemies. This speech is not only directed to the Muslims around the world. The West and the non Muslims should listen. Barack Obama spoke about acknowledging the historical Islamic contribution to sciences, development and thought. He wants his fellow American citizens to learn more about Islam, to be more humble and he expects from all the "liberals" not to impose their views on the practising Muslims, men and women. No one can impose a way of dressing or a way of thinking and we should learn from one another: the implicit reference to the French controversy around the headscarf was indeed quite explicit. He quoted religious texts that were coming from the three monotheistic faiths, everyone of them delivering a universal message. As if true universalism is about educating one's self, listening to and respecting the other. Two days before his speech in Cairo, Obama surprisingly stated that America was a great "Islamic country": it was a way for him to remind the Americans, as well as all the Westerners, that the Muslims are their fellow citizens and Islam is a religion which is part of their common national narrative. A powerful speech which was not only " a speech": it embodies a vision both positive and demanding. Something has surely changed. As Barack went from personal to universal principles, we are waiting for him to go from ideal to practical. He is young, he is new, he is intelligent and smart: has he the means of being courageous? For it is all about presidential courage as one wonders if it is possible for the United States to be simply consistent with its own values. Could one man tackles and reforms this extraordinary tension that inhabits the contemporary American mindset : on the one hand, promoting universal values and diversity while on the other nurturing a spirit that still has some features of imperial attitude (intellectually, politically and economically). He will not be able to achieve it alone and maybe his greatest challengers so far are more Indian and Chinese than the Muslims. Yet, it remains critical to acknowledge the positive sides of a speech announcing "a new beginning": it is imperative for the Muslims to take Obama at his word and, instead of adopting either a passive attitude or a victim mentality to contribute to a better world by being self–critical and critical, humble and ambitious, consistent and open. The best way to push Barack Obama to face up to his responsibility in America, in the Middle East or elsewhere is for the Muslims to start by facing up to their own without blindly demonising America or the West or naively idealising a charismatic African-American US President. P.S.: A personal note : President Barack Obama wanted us "to speak the truth". It happens that once I spoke the truth as regard to the illegal American invasion of Iraq and the blind unilateral support of America towards Israel. I have been banned from the States and still remain. It may be one of these inconsistencies that make some of us still doubt the very meaning of political words. Once again a question of consistency. http://www.tariqramadan.com/spip.php?article10699

__._,_.___

[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] How is Awami League?

How is Awami League?   Will the party be able to hold its council within the Election Commission's stipulated time? With the ministers embroiled in affairs of the state, several leaders inert and inactive and many more having passed away since the last council, the party may not be able to meet the deadline...   by ANWAR PARVEZ HALIM   Awami League swept to power on the dream of a "digital Bangladesh". Recently Sajib Wazed Joy, son and advisor of Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, visited the country and spoke in the same lines of building a digital Bangladesh. In fact, "digital Bangladesh" has become a key phrase now and people's curiousity about what this means is growing by the day.   Digital gaffes   Of course, everyone in this digital day and age are well aware of computer slip-ups and electronic errors. And Awami League's website has its fair share of digital gaffes. Since Awami League's last council, held on December 26, 2002, the party has had its advisory council, central committee, secretaries, national committee, sub-committees and so on. The members of these bodies total 292 in all. These names are listed in the latest update of Awami League's website, yet at least 19 persons on the list have long since passed away. The word 'late' has been added to seven of their names while the remaining 12 are just named with no suffix. Any newcomer to the website will assume these persons are alive. As for those with 'late' suffixed to their names, how can they be members when they are not even alive? Awami League has a Centre for Research. This centre could have updated the website and avoided the mistakes.. All said and done, Awami League admittedly has the most developed and informative website as compared to the other political parties of the country.   Advisory council   The Awami League website (www.albd.org), among other information, lists the names of all the members of its various committees. An analysis of these committees can give a fair picture of the party's present organisational state. Twelve of the 46 members of Awami League's advisory council have passed away. The deceased leaders include SAMS Kibria, Abdul Mannan, Abdul Momen, Gaziul Haq, ASHK Sadek, Mizanur Rahman Chowdhury, General Mustafizur Rahman, Advocate Ozair Faruk, Siddique Hossain, Dr. MA Qadri, Dr. Shamsul Huda Haroun and Imamuddin Ahmed. Of the living 34 members, Abul Mal Abdul Muhith, Khandakar Musharraf Hossain, Reza Ali, AH Mahmud Ali and SA Abu Bakr have become MPs. Of them, two have become ministers. They are Abdul Mal Abdul Muhith and Engineer Musharraf Hossain. Dr. Saidur Rahman and SM Nurunnabi live abroad. Among the advisors, Dr. SA Malek, M Abdur Rahim, Engineer Mazharul Islam, Abdur Rab Chowdhury, Maj. Gen. (retd) Golam Mowla and Maj. Gen. (retd) AMSA Amin are inactive due to ill-health, age and other reasons. The remaining advisors are more or less active.   Presidium   Awami League has 13 presidium members. Of the 13 listed presidium members, Abdus Samad Azad is deceased. Zohra Tajuddin and Ataur Rahman Kaiser are inactive. Of the remaining 10, Zillur Rahman is President and Matia Chowdhury is Minister for Agriculture. The other eight presidium members have not been given place in the cabinet. They are Sajeda Chowdhury, Amir Hossain Amu, Tofail Ahmed, Abdur Razzak, Suranjit Sengupta, Mohiuddin Khan Alamgir, Sheikh Selim and Kazi Zafrullah. At the centre, the party President Sheikh Hasina is Prime Minister. Acting General Secretary Syed Ashraful Islam has been made minister, but General Secretary Abdul Jalil has been deprived of a place in the cabinet. There is no guarantee that his luck will change in the future.   Secretaries   According to the party's website, Awami League presently has 30 secretaries. Of them, at present, 10 have been placed in the cabinet Abdul Mannan, Dr. Abdur Razzak, Nurul Islam Nahid, Col. (retd) Faruk Khan, Syed Abul Hossain, Sahara Khatun, Yafes Osman, Sheikh Abdullah, Hasan Masud and Dipu Moni. In the meantime, Akhteruzzaman, Mukul Bose, Saber Hossain Chowdhury, Dewan Saifur Arefin Tutul, Najma Rahman, Alamgir Kumkum and Habibur Rahman Siraj are not very visible in party activities. Mahmudur Rahman Manna is often seen on TV talk-shows, but has reportedly fallen from Hasina's grace because of his role as a reformist. Saber Hossain Chowdhury is in the same boat. From various leaders of the party it has been learnt that Sheikh Hasina places the most importance on the presidium. They are the most powerful in the party and in future they will be seen in key positions. Obaidul Kader may not have been made a minister, but Hasina assigns him to the important task of running the party. Party sources claim that at the coming council Obaidul Kader may be made General Secretary.   Members of the central committee   Two of the 26 central committee members have passed away. They are former Mayor Mohammed Hanif and Sudhangshu Shekhar Halder. Four have been made ministers. They are Abdul Latif Siddiqui, Raziuddin Raju, Begum Monnujan Sufian and Mustafizur Rahman Fizer. Mohiuddin Chowdhury, Talukdar Abdul Khaleq and Khairuzzaman Liton have been made mayors of Chittagong, Khulna and Rajshahi respectively. In the meantime, Abdul Hasnat Abdullah, Mofazzel Hossain Chowdhury Maya, Akhteruzzaman Babu, Mustafa Rashidi Suja and Sharfuddin Ahmed Jhuntu are relatively inactive for the time being. As many of them face corruption and criminal charges, their position in the party is shaky too. Many are of the opinion that these leaders will not be able to return to their former posts in the party. Not having secured nominations in the election, a number of leaders were rather miffed and remained aloof from the party initially, but are now back in full swing. These include Prof.. Abu Sayeed, KM Jahangir and Mohammed Nasim. Having being a reformist, Mohammed Omar Ali is not in very good standing. Lotus Kamal MP has become active. Engineer Mosharraf Hossain, not being given a place in the cabinet, has been silent.   Assistant secretaries of the sub-committee   There are 113 assistant secretaries. Of them, two have died -- Rashida Mohiuddin from illness and Mushtaque Ahmed Sentu in the August 21 grenade blast. And six of the assistant secretaries were elected as members of the parliament in the last election. They are Sohel Taj, Manzur Qader Quraishi, Iqbalur Rahim, Nurul Islam Sujan, Nasirul Hamid Bipu and Khaleda Mahmud Chowdhury. Of them, only Sohel Taj was made minister but now he too has reportedly resigned. (The Prime Minister has not accepted his resignation but given him extended leave.) Mahbubul Huq Shakil has been made DPS to the Prime Minister and Abdus Sobhan Golap has been made Special Assistant to the Prime Minister. Among these young leaders, quite a few are inactive at present. These include Bahalul Majnu Chunnu, Mainuddin Hasan Chowdhury, Mosharraf Hossain, Jasimuddin Ahmed, Adv. Mostaque Hossain, Eng. Akhtarul Alam, Dr. Muhammed Yusuf, Dr. Ehsanul Huq Khaleque, Shammi Ahmed, Syed Sheyekul Arefin, Najibur Rahman Nipu, Md. Ismail Hossain, Kamrul Morshed Khoka, Ruhul Amin, Ali Haider, Kazi Ebadat Hossain, Adv. Shafiq Mohammed Pintu, Ripon, Syed Fazlul Rahman, Abdur Rauf Sikder, Mujibur Rahman Howladar, Nasiruddin Pintu, Khoka Sikder and Khijir Hayat Lizu. A certain assistant secretary, on condition on anonymity, tells PROBE, "Some of the assistant secretaries are politicians while others are actually businessmen. The politicians give time to the party, but most of the others have bagged their posts by proffering handsome donations. They are now inactive." Among the active ones, many are nursing grudges for not being nominated in the last election. They feel they are not being given due recognition for their work by the seniors and that is why they are unwilling to give their all to their party as in the past.. Many young leaders spoke in this vein, though, at the same time they are hoping for a change in luck with the coming council.   National committee   There are 47 members of the national committee, one each in 47 districts. Of them, Ahsanullah Master of Gazipur and Mumtazuddin of Natore were killed by criminal assailants. The others may be active, but somewhat disorganised. Other than them, there are another 14 members nominated by the party President.   A standstill   In the last election many bigwigs of the party were not given nomination. Again, among many important leaders who were nominated and even became MPs, many were not accommodated in the cabinet. Most of them were leaders of the sixties, leaders who had been groomed in politics by Sheikh Mujibur Rahman. Some of them had become reformists after 1/11 and thus fell from Hasina's grace. Hasina's word is law in the party and she is now focussing on young leadership. She has made them ministers too. But concentrating on their cabinet duties, these young ones are failing to look after party matters. And the veterans are smarting from the blatant cold shoulder they have been given. No matter what façade they may adopt, they find it difficult to pay attention to party work. And this is having an effect on the organisational activities. While senior leaders Tofail Ahmed, Amir Hossain Amu and Abdur Razzak have a lot of influence all over the country, they are not able to wield that influence now. They cannot form committees with people of their own choice without the nod from Hasina. In fact, according to sources, many of the seniors have been given the message that they will be dropped from the committee in the coming council. This has left them disinterested in party work. In the district committees, tussles are in full force over the various posts. This too has slowed down the organisational activities to a near standstill. All this is causing the delay in holding the council, sources say. When contacted about the party's organisational activities, at least half a dozen of the leaders were unwilling to speak in this regard. They even refused to be named.   Ministers of change   Other than three or four ministers, Hasina has selected relatively young persons for her cabinet. They are the "soldiers of change". From their statements and speeches, it seems as if one of their priorities is to highlight the faults of the four-party alliance government. As for their performance regarding their respective ministries, many are found to be short of the mark. Did the veteran leader Matia Chowdhury, who is Minister for Agriculture, manage to deliver fertiliser and pesticide in time to the farmers, as she claims? And that is not the only concern. Farmers are not getting value for their crops and are at a total loss, as far as media reports go. And if medals were awarded for volubility, Commerce Minister Col. (retd) Faruk Khan would be decorated heavily by now. Yet the prices of rice, lentils and other essentials are shooting up. Food Minister Dr. Razzak, on the other hand, had devoted himself to the cause of food security and opts for work rather than words. And from the outset of their careers in the cabinet, Foreign Minister Dipu Moni and State Minister for Foreign Affairs Hasan Masud have busied themselves with trips abroad. But the people are still in the dark of their achievements so far. Bangladesh's migrant workers are being sent back in hordes. Some are returning as corpses. And Labour Minister Khandakar Mosharraf Hossain says that he is "observing the situation". Home Minister Advocate Sahara Khatun has said she will uproot terrorists even if she has to dig deep underground. In the meantime, murder, extortion, muggings, robbery and crime in general is on a steady rise. State Minister for Home Affairs Sohel Taj seems to be overwhelmed by the volume of work and even tendered in his resignation. This has not been accepted; he has been given extended leave instead. Perhaps a break from work will revive his spirit. The ministers are committed to change, so much so that they are unable to give time to affairs of the party.. This has created a distance between them and the party workers and supporters.   Surprises ahead   Down from the grassroots up till the centre, the party is abuzz with rumours that the coming council has a large number of surprises in store. What are these surprises? Certain senior leaders feel that Sheikh Hasina may appoint certain loyal followers to the committee which will mean the axe for several of the veterans. A number of think-tanks affiliated with the party, however, tell PROBE that if the leaders of the sixties are dropped, the committee will be weakened considerably. They say that Hasina will retain the senior leaders in respectable positions and then rearrange the party. A central leader on the party, preferring anonymity, says, "Sheikh Mujib was the leader of these leaders of the sixties. Sheikh Hasina is the leader of her loyal following at the present. Now it all depends on her whether she will rely on her loyal following alone or whether she will hold on to the followers of Sheikh Mujib. The coming council will answer these questions." Sources within the party say that neither Abdul Jalil nor Syed Ashraful Islam will be given the post of General Secretary. There is a possibility of Matia Chowdhury being given the post, though the most likely choice is Obaidul Kader. According to the party constitution, the council is to be held every three years. Awami League's last council was held on December 26, 2002. Six years has passed since then; two councils could have been held in this time. There is always the excuse, of course, that the council could not be held during the two-year unconstitutional rule of the caretaker government.  But the real reason behind the failure to hold the council is plain and simple -- a degenerated political culture which has gripped the country over the past years. The Election Commission has stipulated that the political parties must hold their councils by July 25 this year, at the latest. Party leaders say that the BDR incident, which took place so soon after the government came to power, had set things back considerably. On March 28 a sub-committee was formed to amend the party constitution and prepare for the council. Sheikh Hasina head the sub-committee. This 20-member committee hasn't been able to hold a single meeting as yet. Presidium member Kazi Zafrullah, however, has said that preparations for the council are on in full swing. He says that it may not be possible to hold the council in July, but it will certainly be held this year. He could not give a specific date or month, however. The draft for the party constitution and manifesto is almost final. However, it has not been possible so far to form new committees in all the 72 organisational districts. The same situation prevails in the party's front organisations. It may take another three or four months for these committees to be formed. And then Sheikh Hasina will summon the council.     Lost leaders   The following leaders of Awami League passed away over the last eight years:     SAMS Kibria, Member, Advisory Council ASHK Sadek Member, Advisory Council Mizanur Rahman Chowdhury, Member, Advisory Council Abdul Mannan, Member, Advisory Council Abdul Momen, Member, Advisory Council Gen (retd) Mustafizur Rahman, Member, Advisory Council Siddique Hossain, Member, Advisory Council Imamuddin Ahmed, Member, Advisory Council Dr. Shamsul Huda Haroun, Member, Advisory Council Adv. Ozair Faruk, Member, Advisory Council Gaziul Haq, Member, Advisory Council Dr. MA Qadri, Member, Advisory Council Abdus Samad Azad, Member, Presidium Member Mohammed Hanif, Central Committee Member Sudhangshu Shekhar Halder, Central Committee Member Rashida Mohiuddin, Assistant Secretary, Sub-Committee Mushtaque Ahmed Sentu, Assistant Secretary, Sub-Committee Md. Momtaz Uddin, National Committee Member Ahsanullah Master, National Committee Member  parvez1966@yahoo.com   http://www.probenewsmagazine.com/index.php?index=2&contentId=5253

__._,_.___

[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

__,_._,___