[ALOCHONA] Urgency of tackling climate change

Urgency of tackling climate change   Ed Miliband and Douglas Alexander WITH the clock ticking and less than a hundred days to go until ministers from around the world meet at the UN climate change conference in Copenhagen, Denmark, now is the time for the UK and [South Asia/India/Bangladesh] to work together to get a climate deal that is fair to the region's economy and its people.     Bangladesh is suffering the most because of climate change. Photo: Adnan/ Drik News We are here in South Asia to hear what climate change means for millions of people in India and Bangladesh. For this region, the case for the urgency of tackling climate change is beyond question. Flooding of the Kosi river over the past two years has driven millions from their homes in Nepal and Bihar. Cyclones Aila and Nargis have killed thousands and displaced millions more in Burma, Bangladesh and West Bengal. Torrential rains have caused terrible landslides across the Himalayas. And now a weakened monsoon is causing a drought, which threatens hundreds of millions of farmers all over India, Bangladesh and Nepal. Once again, the number of farmer suicides is increasing. While none of these natural disasters can be directly attributed to climate change, scientists predict that they will become more frequent and more severe unless we act. Alongside the terrible human toll, these disasters exact an economic cost -- with the loss of economic growth in South Asia from environmental causes equivalent to double that from the global economic crisis, each and every year. It is the poorest who are most vulnerable to these natural disasters. And it is the poorest who are most severely affected by climate change. They must be at the forefront of our minds as we decide what sort of deal we want at Copenhagen. Doubly so, because they have done the least to cause the problem and their voices are rarely heard in the negotiations or the media. It is their voice we have come to South Asia to hear. Yet we have also come to listen to those communities, businesses and Governments around the region who are pioneering responses to climate change. From sustainable forestry in Nepal, to flood-resistant crops in Bangladesh, to renewable energy production in India, there is much to learn. We can also draw encouragement and optimism that the world is taking the issue more seriously. In July world leaders, including Prime Ministers Manmohan Singh and Gordon Brown, agreed to strive to keep global temperature rise within a 2 degrees threshold, beyond which the risks of dangerous climate change rise significantly. As well as coming to listen, we have also come to South Asia to explain that we recognise the role that developed countries must play in facing up to our duties to help solve the problem of climate change. And we are here to work with the Indian and Bangladeshi Governments, to help secure an ambitious, fair and effective deal in Copenhagen. Firstly, the UK recognises developed countries' historic responsibility for climate change. The developed world must lead in the response and must do more. That means ambitious commitments to reduce emissions, including from the United States and Europe. The UK has set out plans to reduce its emissions by one third by 2020 compared to 1990 and our Climate Change Act puts our stringent targets in legislation. We are prepared to go even further as part of a global deal. Secondly, developed countries must meet our commitment to provide the finance and technology to help developing countries address the challenges of climate change. Prime Minister Gordon Brown recently launched a climate finance initiative which put a global figure of around $100 billion every year by 2020 to help developing countries address climate change, including adapting to its impacts. Finance needs to flow in the context of an ambitious global deal. Thirdly, on the basis that action must be lead by developed countries, we recognise that at this stage, developing countries in South Asia will not take on national emission reduction targets. But equally, we know that allied to strong action by developed countries, we need developing countries to pursue a low carbon development path if we are to have a hope of tackling the problem of climate change. That is why it is welcome that India is taking important steps to increase the use of renewable energy, particularly solar power, to increase the energy efficiency of its economy and to increase forest cover. It is demonstrating the carbon savings that can be achieved through these actions. But it is taking these steps to put its economy onto a low carbon path because it recognises the benefits for its energy security and sustainable development. Bangladesh, a very low-energy consuming country, is pursuing a low-carbon growth path whilst building its resilience to climate change, reducing the risks climate change poses to national development. This is the kind of action, which the UK stands ready to assist. We are keen to learn how, as part of a global climate deal, we can help India and Bangladesh to build on these plans, thereby helping to tackle together the climate challenge and lift millions more out of poverty. We are here together because we recognise that whilst we cannot hope to eliminate poverty in South Asia without facing this global climate challenge; neither can we hope to achieve a global climate deal without facing this region's development challenge. The decisions made in December at the climate conference will be some of the most important the world will take for decades and are vital for the future security and prosperity of South Asia. We look forward to all countries playing their part in an outcome at the Copenhagen climate change talks, which is good for development and good for the future sustainability of our planet. To know more about UK's position at Copenhagen, visit: www.actoncopenhagen.gov.uk. The Rt Hon Douglas Alexander is UK Secretary of State for International Development, and The Rt Hon Ed Miliband is UK Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change http://www.thedailystar.net/story.php?nid=103678

__._,_.___

[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] Will it happen?

Time is a crucial factor in every crime. Time soothes pain and removes scars. High profile criminals become ordinary human beings and their crimes lose attention and victims become generous and forgiving. The memories of Holocaust remained a matter of great concern to the Jews because they are still afraid of annihilation by their adversaries. The Jews due to their constant fear to be overwhelmed by their mortal enemies, the Arabs, politically keep this memory of the Holocaust alive to draw world attention for support and help. The genocide in Bangladesh in 1971 and its local henchmen Jamate Islami is not a matter to be washed away by time. The long expected trial should have taken place long ago and the Awami League had two stints of power in the country to finish this trial. In the third stint of power there was promise and some movements in this respect. But politics does not have morals always. After 39 years the demand is there but will is not strong enough to conduct the trial. Late Gen.Ziaur Rahman was a freedom fighter himself but did not show any interest in matter. During the tenure of Begum Zia she herself became a company of the collaborators. We also should not forget that even Awami League itself made a political understanding with the collaborators when they had power before. The Jamate Islami has made many calculated inroads into many strategic national sectors under the umbrella of BNP and now is in a position to dictate or threaten the present government. In the present circumstances it will need tremendous audacity and will power to conduct this long awaited trial. The spectre of Islamic fundamentalism has spread its tentacles everywhere and this has gained some satanic powers to dictate some terms. The nation will be relived if the collaborators are really put into trial but how far this will happen is a matter of guess for many.

 

Akbar Hussain

Canada

 

---

Click less, mail more: Hotmail on the new MSN homepage!

__._,_.___

[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

__,_._,___

Re: [ALOCHONA] Orign of the Tribes of Chittaging Hill Tracts (CHTs)

Goebbelsian Isha

Can you ask your mate Abid to footnote his story. Without footnotes or source informations (original or secondary) this is worthless.

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Isha Khan
Sent: Aug 28, 2009 9:01 PM
To: Dhaka Mails
Subject: [ALOCHONA] Orign of the Tribes of Chittaging Hill Tracts (CHTs)

 

Orign of the Tribes of Chittaging Hill Tracts (CHTs) By Abid Bahar, Canada Introduction:Arakan was a medieval kingdom located at the edge of South Asia became a province of Burma after the Burmese invasion in 1784 and the subsequent annexation of it with Burma. To the people of India and Bangladesh, Arakan became sadly memorable for the tragic massacre of the Moghul prince Shah Suja and his entire family by the Arakanese king Sandathudamma. It is important to note that Shah Suja before taking shelter in Arakan was the Moghul Govornor of Bengal (1639-60) and was being chased by the Moghal General Mir Jumbla. Suja was given the assurance of assylum by the Arakanese Mogh king. However, soon after his arrival in Arakan, Suja was robbed and then in 1661 at the order of the king the entire family was massacred. This tragic event triggered anger and frustration both in Arakan among Suja’s followers that accompanied him and also in the Moghul capital Delhi against the brutal murder of the royal family. Subsequent to the death of Shah Suja, the Moghals led a campaign led by Shah Suja’s uncle Shaista Khan who reconquered Chittagong. After the massacre of the Moghul prince and the chain of events of repeated uprising led to internal chaos in Arakan. At the same time, with the mighty Moghul presence in the Bay, Arakan lost its lucrative revenue from piracy and of slave trade. The new circumstances brought an end to the infamous “Golden age” of Arakan that survived through causing human suffering and misery. In our contemporary period the event of Suja and the massacre of his family is not the reason why understanding the dynamics of ethnic relations in Arakan and by extention in Burma becomes so central; it is largely to watchfully understand the roots of racism in Arakan and to recognize the refugee production trends of the region. Indeed, Alamgir Serajuddin expresses rather bluntly the reasons behind the Arakan problem by saying, "The Arakanese [Rakhines] were a daring and turbulent people, a terror at once to themselves and to their neighbours. They fought among themselves and changed masters at will. Peace at home under a strong ruler signaled danger for neighbours."(1) True, Arakan a kingdom based essentially on slave trade when it had strong leader was a constant threat to its neighbors for its robbers but taking advantage of the internal chaos there led the Burmese occupation of Arakan and the subsequent neglect under the Burmese rule and the continued Burmese annexation of the Arakani territory subsequently turned Arakan into a tiny and backward province of Burma-no doubt it is the price of being disorderly. Despite its present improvised existance, Arakan continued to make headlines in the international media not for any glorious present but for producing refugees. The people that have been exterminated are no more the Moghs but are the Rohingyas of northern Arakan. They complain that Rakhine hoodlums along with the Burmese military are involved in a war of intimidation against them. Rohingyas have been taking shelter in Southern Chittagong. Burmese Military government and their Mogh collaborators claim that these refugees are “Chittagongnian people”originally from Bangladesh. Contrary to the claim, surprisingly even the more recent, the 1978 Rohingya refugees were found to carry Burmese National Registration cards. (2) But in the 1991-92’s there was the fresh eviction of refugees, the latter Rohingyas arrived in Bangladesh without the NRC cards. Rohingya leaders claim that the NRCs were being confiscated before the eviction. Chris Lewa of Forum Asia says Rohingyas were “… being discriminated against on the basis of their ethnicity and religion. They have been excluded from the nation-building process in Myanmar and the military regime has implemented policies of exclusion and discrimination against this group aimed at encouraging them to leave the country. These systematic policies have maintained underdevelopment and have been the driving force behind two mass refugee exoduses to Bangladesh, in 1978 and again in 1991/92. The combination of human right violations the Rohingya face -- from the denial of legal status to restriction of movement and economic constraints -- creates food insecurity and makes life in Northern Rakhine State untenable for many. Chris Lewa adds, “Rohingya children, in particular, are innocent victims suffering from the debilitating consequences of these government policies, which dramatically affect their physical and mental development, and will have long-lasting effects for the future of the Rohingya community.” (3) It appears that the influx of refugees from Burma is not a new phenomenon. The present research findings show that Burmese invasion of Arakan resulting in the creation of refugees has been a cronic problem in this region. Even before 1978 mass eviction of the Rohingyas, historically there had been large scale refugee movements to Chittagong of Bangladesh. As a result of the historic Burmese invasions of Arakan, in addition to the contemporary Rohingyas exodus, it even led to the rise of Arakani origin population in southern Chittagong and in the Chittagong Hill Tracts of Bangladesh. Among them are the Chakmas (Northern Chittagong Hill Tracts), Rakhines (In Cox’s Bazar), Marma (In Banderbon), Tanchainga (in the central Chittagong Hill Tracts). Burmese Invasions of Arakan Among the many Burman invasions, there had been three major recorded attacks on Arakan. First was by Anawrahta in 1044 A.D. and the second invasion was by Min Khaung Yaza’s invasion in 1406 and the third major invasion was by Budapawa in 1784. Anawrahta’s Invasion of Arakan (1044) Anawrahta (1044-77), by killing his own brother claimed the throne of Northern Burma for himself. He made Theravada Buddhism as the dominant political religion of Burma. It was in 1044 A.D. he invaded Arakan. Anawrahta, who also destroyed the Mon kingdom in the South, was known as one of the most violent kings of Burma. Ironically he also introduced Buddhism in Burma. He gave Buddhism, (originally a nonviolent religion,) a racial and political dimention in Burmese politics. Anawrahta was known as a “religious fanatic” and his attack of Northern Arakan left some mark in this direction. At this time, the Chandra-Rohingyas (Hindu-Muslim mixed) population of Arakan were concentrated in the north was racially different from the Burmese population. The xenophobic king invaded Arakan as a mission to bring change from an Indianized population into an Asian variety and helped settle Tabeto-Burman Buddhist population. It was during his time that Chakmas, although racially mongoloid, but speaking a Chandra- Chittagonian language even felt threatned by the xenophobic invasion, left Arakan for Southern Chittagong. King Min Khaung Yaza’s Invasion of Arakan (1406) In 1406 A. D., the second Burmese invasion was led by the Burmese King Min Khaung Yaza. As a consequence, Noromi-kala, the king of Arakan along with his large followers took asylum at Gaur, the court of Bengal sultan Gaisuddin Azam Shah. This invasion also led to a large scale influx of people who were the followers of the king to settle in Bengal. In 1430 A. D., after 24 years of exile in Bengal, Sultan Jalal uddin Khan sent his General "Wali Khan as the head of 20 thousand pathan army" to restore Noromikla to his throne. Noromi Kla now takes the name Sulauman Shah and becomes the king. He shifted his Captial to a new palace site in Mrohaung. In 1431 General Wali Khan removes Noromi Kla and rules Arakan. General Wali Khan, the first independent Muslim ruler of Arakan. He first introduced Persian as the official language of Arakan. Noromi-kla again escapes to Bengal to seek help from the Sultan of Bengal. 1433 Nadir Shah, the Bengal Sultan sent General Sindhi Khan with 30,000 solders to help restore Noromi -kla as the king. After this event, Arakan becomes a province of Bengal. Wali Khan was killed in the battle and his followers were allowed to settle near Kalander River. In return for the help, the Arakannse king promised to return the twelve feuds of Chittagong, which most likely be the the whole of southern Chittagong that was then under Arakanese rule. Arakan began to pay annual taxes and Persian continued to be used as the court language. The consequence of the retaking over of Arakan by Noromi -kla with the help of the Muslim army had the effect of the settlement of a great number of Rohingya Muslim population in Arakan. (4) Budapawa’s Invasion of Arakan (1784) The 1784 Burmese invasion of Arakan was considered by historians as a genocide for its ruthlessness massacre of Arakanese population of both Rohingya and Rakhine groups. In the month of December, 1784 Burmese king Budapawa attacked Arakan with 30,000 soldiers and returned with 20,000 people as prisoners, destroyed temples, shrines, mosques, seminaries, and libraries including the Royal library. Muslims serving the Royal palace as ministers were also massacred. The Burmese king in order to put down the Arakanese Buddhist spirit also took away Mohamuni, the famous Buddhist statue, a symbol of Arakanese pride of independence. The Mohamuni was cast in bronze amd colored in gold. It was sent across the mountains of Taungpass. There were hundreds of Moghs and Muslims forced to carry the statue to Burma through the inacessable mountanious pass which led to the death of hundreds as they were on their way to Burma. The kings advise to his invading commenders that "If one cuts down the 'Kyu' reed, do not let even its stump remain." Ga Thandi, the king of Arakan took shelter with his followers in the deep jungles of Chittagong where his decendents still live in Bandarbon. They now call themselves as the Marma. Interestingly, among the people Budapawa carried with him were Rohingyas, a British scholar visiting Burma in 1799 met some people who identified themselves as the Rohingyas. (5) During the time of the Burmese invasion of Arakan, Chittagong came under the British rule. The British never attempted to rescue the Arakani king to his throne. To escape the brutal attack of the Burmese King both Muslims and Hindus of Arakan fled to safety in Chittagong. Puran Bisungri, a Hindu Rohingya "was an officer of the police station of Ramoo."He was born in Arakan and fled the country after Burmese invasion in 1784.” (5) Harvey says, traditionally Burmese cruelty was such that " to break the spirit of the people, they would drive men, women and children into bamboo enclosures and burn them alive by the hundreds." This resulted in the depopulation of minority groups such that "there are valleys where even today the people have scarcely recovered their original numbers, and men still speak with a shudder of 'manar upadrap' (the oppression of the Burmese)."(6) During the invasion of Arakan, the Burmese king took with him 3,700 Muslims and settled them in Mandalay. Some of them were known to even become the Ministers to the Burmese king. The decendents of the 3,700 Muslims are known as Thum Htaung Khunya (Three thousand seven hundred). For the continued oppression, in Southern Chittagong, a term was coined for Arakan of now Burma as the "Moghur Mulluk" meaning the land of lawless people, generally referring to the Burmese oppression of the time. The Arakaniese Muslims and Hindus that continued to escape to Chittagong ro settle there were called by the Chittagonian Bengalis as the “Rohi.” "During the seven years of their operation, the population of Arakan was reduced by no less than half. During the early months of 1884, a quarter of a million {refugees took shelter} in the English territory of Chittagong."(7) The oppression of the Burmese became clear from what refugees had to say at the time: We will never return to the Arakan country; if you choose to slaughter us here we are willing to die; if you drive us away we will go and dwell in the jungles of the great mountains.(8) It was during this time that Rakhines of Bangladesh in the Cox’s Bazar area, Rohingyas in great numbers and some smaller Arakani tribes also took shelter in Chittagong. The most significant rise of nonBengali settlement in Chittagong took place due to this Burmese genocide that took place in 1784. Brithish rule (1826 AD - 1942 AD) After the Burmese conquest of Arakan, the Burmese king demanded the fugitives be returned. In 1824 a decisive war between the Burmese and the British took place resulting in the British occupation of Arakan. By now due to the merciless massacre, Arakan almost became depopulated. "When the British occupied Arakan, the country was a scarcely populated area. Formerely high- yield peddy fields of the fertile Kalandan and Lemro river valleys germinated nothing but wild plants for many years. (9) Mogh Memories of the past and the rise of anti-Rohingya racist jolts and shaking in Arakan. It was in the Kalandan and Lemro river valleys where Rohingya Muslims were farmers and peasants. There were fewer people to cultivate the land. Rakines males normally love to enjoy entertainment than do the hardwork. Rohingyas were the hardworking peasants.The British adopted the policy “to encourage the ...inhabitants from the adjacent areas to migrate into fertile valleys in Arakan as agriculturists. ... A Superndent, later an Assistant commisioner of Bengal, was sent in 1828 for the administration of Arakan Division, which was divided into three districts repectively,: Akyab, Kyaukpyu, and Sandoway, with an assistant commissioner in each district.”(10) After the British conquest, despite the memories of horror, but naturally out of nostalgia, some Rakhines and Rohingya refugees from Chittagong returned to Arakan. Aye Chan, a xenophobic Rakhine writer calls these returnees as the settlements of foreigners in Arakan. He calls them as “Influx Viruses.” Surprisingly, he remains silent to the Rakhine returnees to Arakanese returning home. He also finds the huge Rakine (Mogh) and Rohingya settlement in Southern Chittagong due to Budapawa’s genocide as normal. He characterizes the slight increase in the Muslim population in Arakan after the British conquest as the settlement by "Chittagonian Bengali Muslims."(11) Aye Chan's claim of these people as being Chittagonians is due to the fact that he didn’t take into account the fact that many of the original uprooted people of Arakan returned to Arakan to claim their possessions. Given such a disturbing climate in Arakan after such a destruction by the Burmese king, one wonders, why Chittagonians living in a relatively peaceful region would migrate to Arakan. Naturally, the Muslim migrants were the original Rohingya inhabitants of Arakan returning to their ancestral homes. It is evident from the fact that in the aftermath of the genocide, despite the return of order by the British occupation, but the fear of uncertainity still persisted and the returnees driven by nostalgia and even many other Rohingyas preferred to work in Arakan only as "seasonal labourers." 1930 and 1938 anti Indian riots. In the meantime, there was 1930 and 1938 anti Indian riots and Burma for Burmese campaign led by the Monks made Muslims of Arakan felt the threat of their existence in Burma but the British census at this time made things more complicated for the Arakani Rohingyas. The British identified the Rohingyas of Arakan as the Indian Muslims. Japanese Rule (1942-1945) The next large scale migration of Rohingyas to Chittagong took place during World War 11. In 1942 Japan occupied Burma and the ultra-nationalist Buddhists jointly massacred the Karens, the Mons and in Arakan the Rohingyas. Feeling the threat of extinction, and certain Rakhines determined to drive out the Muslims of Arakan, Muslim leaders officially took the already existing name for their suffering community as the “Rohingyas.” However, Rohingyas were conveniently identified by the Rakhine extremists as being the “Chittagonians.” During the time of Japanese occupation, the number of Rohingya death in Arakan was staggering to be over 100,000. Rohingyas call the event as the "Karbalai Arakan," the bloodshed in Arakan. (12) In 1942 when the British withdrew from Arakan, the Japanese immediately took over control of Arakan. The Arakanese xenophobic hoodlums began to incite people with the slogan, "our brothers came, and your brothers left you." The hoodlums began to attack the Muslim villages in souhern Arakan and the Rohingya Muslims fled to the North where they took vengeance on the Rakhines in Buthidaung and Maungdaw townships(13) Ashraf Alam provides a list of 294 villages destroyed in the pogroms of 1942: (a) Myebon in Kyaukpru District 30 villages; (b) Minbya in Akyab District 27 villages; (c) Pauktaw in Akyab District 25 villages; (d) Myohaung in Akyab District 58 villages; (e) Kyauktaw in Akyab District 78 villages; (f) Ponnagyun in Akyab District 5 villages; (g) Rathedaung in Akyab District 16 villages; and (h) Buthidaung in Akyab District 55 villages. (14) In 1950, a memorandum by the public of Maungdaw demanded the protection of fundamental rights and demanded an unconditional repatriation of Rohingyas from Chittagong. Yoger claims that during this time the Arakani Muslim migration to Chittagong was at 20,000.(16) There was no action taken by the British to bring the Rohingya refugees back to Arakan. But due to this event, the Rakhine-Rohingya relations deteriorated further. Aye Chan says: "It is certain that hundreds of Muslim inhabitants of southern Arakan fled north. “(15). At the same time Chan from his chauvinistic believes contradicted himself by saying that Rohingyas in Butheding, Maungdaw etc. areas in the north bordering Bangladesh are migrants from Chittagong. In this Chan seems to have failed to keep consistency in his arguments. Rohingya Refugees in Chittagong during U Nu’s period (1948-1962) In 1948 Burma became independent from British rule. Rohingyas again began to be protectionless. Aung San became Burma's democracy leader. He was trying to bring ethnic harmony through dialogue with ethnic minorities but the entire team of democracy leaders including Aung San was assisinated by powerful quarters who sought to control Burma by force. 1958 Rohingya refugges took shelter in East Pakistan; the number of refugees identified as being 10,000. (17) 1959, Burma agreed with East Pakistan governor Zakir Hossain to take back Rohingya refugees who had taken shelter in Chittagong in 1958. When questioned "why refugees were pouring into Pakistan from Burma, the Govornor replied that the government of Burma had noting to do with it. Actually the Moghs of Arakan were creating the trouble." (18) In 1960 The Daily Guardian, Rangoon, 27th October 1960 reports that Burmese "Supreme Court queshes expulsion orders against Arakanese Muslims."(19) It is true, the disturbances were not entirely foreign inspired. Pumped up in prejudice by the leading Pongyi activist, U Ottama, from 1930’s Arakan became anti-Rohingya and anti-Muslim. (20) Rohingya Refugees during Military rule (1962-) In 1962, General Ne Win took over power and confiscated most Indian and Chinese owned busineses in Rangoon and began his “Burmanization policy” which advocated that "Burma is for Burmans," referring that Burma is for racially Mongoloid and religiously Buddhist people. Ne Win first began a policy of "divide and rule" in Arakan between the Mogh and the Rohingyas. His government identified the Rohingyas as "Indian Bengalis" from Chittagong migrated to Burma during the British period beginning from 1826. (20) As mentioned warlier, in 1978 an officially recorded 207,172 Rohingyas took shelter in Chittagong. UNHCR and Amnesty International investigation found out that Rohingyas were carrying Burmese National Registration cards. I have personally visited the refugee camps in Ukhiya of southern Chittagong. The area was as if a sea of refugee camps. When asked people if they had any documents provng their citizenship, little children ran to their parents to fatch the documents. I have seen NRC certificates with Burmese seal testifying their Burmese nationality. This revealation by international agencies, forced the Burmese government to accept the Rohingyas back to Arakan.(21) In 1982 the military rulers passed the Citizenship Act in which it made a povision that Burmese people' ancestors who came to settle in Burma before 1826 will be considered as "foreigners." Rohingyas were seen as people migrated from Chittagong of Bangladesh after 1826. Aye Chan and other similar Rakhines followed this line of xenophbic interpretation. Aye Chan wrote dehumanizing books and articles, identifying Rohingyas as the Bengali Muslim Immigrants" from Bangladesh.Contrary to such assertions, Rohingya’s earliest ancestory in Arakn however, dates back to the 8th century. Our research shows that Rohingyas called by the Arakan’s Tibeto-Burman population as the “Kulas” were the offsprings of the aboriginl Indian Chandras, Arabs, Persians, the soliders of the Bengal Sultan's army, the offsprings of the Mogh-Portuhuese captured Bengali slaves, Portuguese offsprings. (22). The name Rohingya was adapted by these people from various origins as a survival mechanism. In 1990-92 again over 2,68,000 Rohingyas were sent back to Bangladesh. This time the Burmese government made sure that Rohingyas do not carry any official Burmese document. Rohingyas continue to be identified as "foreigners" and now suffer in the land they were born and brought up. The Burma's military in alliance with the Rakhine ultra-nationalist plays a extermination policy based on fear and intimidation.(23) Habib Siddiqui identifies some of the major armed operations of intimidation against the Rohingya people, orchestrated by the Burmese government since 1948: 01. Military Operation (5th Burma Regiment) - November 1948 02. Burma Territorial Force (BTF) - Operation 1949-50 03. Military Operation (2nd Emergency Chin regiment) - March 1951-52 04. Mayu Operation - October 1952-53 05. Mone-thone Operation - October 1954 06. Combined Immigration and Army Operation - January 1955 07. Union Military Police (UMP) Operation - 1955-58 08. Captain Htin Kyaw Operation - 1959 09. Shwe Kyi Operation - October 1966 10. Kyi Gan Operation - October-December 1966 11. Ngazinka Operation - 1967-69 12. Myat Mon Operation - February 1969-71 13. Major Aung Than Operation - 1973 14. Sabe Operation February - 1974-78 15. Naga-Min (King Dragon) Operation - February 1978-79 (resulting in exodus of some 300,000 Rohingyas to Bangladesh) 16. Shwe Hintha Operation - August 1978-80 17. Galone Operation - 1979 18. Pyi Thaya Operation â€" July 1991-92 (resulting in exodus of some 268,000 Rohingyas to Bangladesh) 19. Na-Sa-Ka Operation â€" since 1992.(24) Despite a clear evidence of Burmese invasion and atrocities on the Rohingyas, resulting in the latter to take shelter in Chittagong, xenophobic writer’s continue to propagate that Rohingyas are "Chittagonians." The intensity of the nationalist hatred by the military reached so deep into the Burmese consciousness that today even some Burmese people began to believe that indeed Rohingyas are "Chittagonians" from Bangladesh. Contrary to this, the present research found that the production of refugees in general and the Rohingya refugees in particular from Arakan is not a new phenomenon; the study reveals that the internal troubles in Arakan along with the historic Burman invasions of Arakan from time to time led to the rise of not only the tribal people in Chittagong and in Chittagong Hill Tracts,( the Arakanese Rakhine settlements in Bandorban and Cox's Bazar, a result of mainly 1784 Burmese invasions, the Chakma settlements in Chittagong Hill Tracts) but also the Rohingyas settlements in the entire southern Chittagong area upto the Sangha River close to Bandarbon. In understanding the refugee problem in Western Burma, the phenomenon of intolerance seems to be the deep-rooted cause. In Burma, Burma’s xenophobic authors continue to brand Rohingyas as the Chittagonians of Bangladesh. Rohingyas are not recognized as the "taingyintha" (indigenous) people of Burma for their racial differences with the Rakhines and the Burmans. It is an encouraging sign to see that, while the ancestors of the Rakhine Moghs of Bandarbon and Cox's Bazar, the Chakmas of Chittagong Hill Tracts and the Rohingyas of Southern Chittagong were originally from Arakan took shelter in Chittagong and Chittagong Hill Tracts throughout this period, in Bangladesh, they are not being seen by Bangladeshis as foreigners from Arakan. It is evident that after the independence of Bangladesh these nonbengalis together with the Bengalis are now being identified on their territorial identity as being the Bangladeshis. The Bangladeshi Rohingyas in southern Chittagng, who migrated before 1971 are also being considered as Bangladeshis. Justifiably, in the democratic Bangladesh, no one should question the birth right of citizenship of the Chakmas, the Moghs and the other smaller tribals and the Bangladeshi Rohingyas. In Arakan however, even after a million Rohingya people left Arakan, who now live in deplorable condition in Bangladesh, India, Pakistan, Malaysia, Japan, Thailand, and in the Gulf states, these ultra-nationalists continue to justify that Rohingyas are not Burmese citizens. It appears that the problem in Arakan is deep enough to go away sooner. This is evident from what U Khin Maung Saw, a typical Arakani xenophobe had to say, "As a born Arakanese [I am as a Rakhine author] is obliged to write the true story of the so-called "Rohingyas."(25) It denied the Rohingya rights by saying” the so-called Rohingya.”Today, Arakan’s “true hisory “refers to an exclusionist history that Arakan belongs to the Rakhines only and wish Rohingyas should be sent to Bangladesh. Reacting to the Burmese policy of extermination of the Rohingyas, Saeed Khan wrote:"People have migrated for work or love or whatever reason during the entire history of mankind... If we go by the logic that …Rohynga people have roots in Chittagong they should all be thrown out of present day Burma/Myanmar then by that logic every person of nonaboroginal root should be thrown out of Australia, and every person with non native American root should be thrown out of America, every one with roots in West bengal in Bangladesh should be thrown out and everyone with roots in East Bengal should be thrown out of West Bengal/India. And if we keep on going like this we will reach a point where everyone should be thrown out of everywhere as according to science and genetics there is no so called "pure race". According to science every one in the present world has roots in a group of people out of Africa. So should we all go back to Africa? (27) In sending everybody to Africa, the only problem is that eversince huma races left Africa, half of Africa dried up to become the uninhabitable Sahara desert. In the meantime, Burmese invasion of Arakan on the Rohingya people continues and they escape persecution by land and by sea by boat risking their lives; those who survive live in refugee camps as Burma’s stateless refugee people. ________ Postscript: ________ In the above article, a review of the historical documents on the orign of the Tribes of Chittaging Hill Tracts show that all the major tribes of Chittagong Hill Tracts, especially the Chakma of Northern Chittagong Hill Tracts, Marma of Bandarbon and the Rakhines of Cox’s Bazar and the Rohingyas settled in Southern Chittagong were originally migrants from Arakan of Burma, the latter one the Rohingyas are the most recent migrants and the Rakhines migrated as late as during the British period. After the liberation war of Bangladesh, the tribals staged armed rebellion against Bangladesh claiming them as being the aboriginal people; on this ground they even wanted the independence of Chittagong Hill Tracts. In this conflict the tribals armed by India, the total number of people both tribals and Bengalis that lost their lives were 1677 among them 1329 were Bengalis) Artifacts found and the given names of Chittagong Hill Tracts show Bengalis have been in Chittagong Hill Tracts from Prehistoric times. The new Bengali settllers in the Hill Tracts however were people mostly from Northern and South Western Bangladesh who land lost land due to river erotion or from the gradual desertification in those regions and according to the most recent Bangladesh census the population of Chittagong Hill Tracts is 45% Muslim Bengali and the rest comprised 55%. Bangladesh constitution rightfully accepts the tribals as the citizens of Bangladesh. However, there is a growing concern that Hasina government giving the tribals the aboriginal status and therefore special status over the Bengalis is denying the rights of Bengalis in the land of their birth. In contrast, it is true, India the broker between the Tribals and the Hasina government itself to stop the the fear of seperation itself settles non Kashmiris in its occupied Kashmir. Many in Bangladesh fear that Bengali rebellion and the move by Hasina against its Bengali population will help the excelleration of Ihe tribal separatist movement that originally began from the time of Bangabandu Sheikh Mijibur Rahman) See for more details on the Hill Tracts: • For details on Chittagong Hill Tracts and comments see Abid Bahar, Issues of Dispute and Contemporary Problems in Chittagong Hill Tracts,http://groups.yahoo.com/group/mukto-mona/message/49338?l=1 _________________ COMMENTS on Abid Bahar’s, Issues of Dispute and Contemporary Problems in Chittagong Hill Tracts : http://indigenousissuestoday.blogspot.com/2008/08/august-5-12-2008-five-key-indigenous.html Koya said... Dear Friend, I belong to the Gond tribe of India and you must be aware that in India tribal are being systematically displaced and killed in the name of development by the Indian Government policies and USA expansion policies in India. We have registered a political party by the name "Prithak Bastar Rajya Party" where we will be demanding a seperate Bastar State to safe gaurd the interest of the tribal.Evo Morales is an inspiration for us. Below is also a video link which might give you some insight to our plight. http://in.youtube.com/watch?v=1O2WwESwJhw I would be grateful if you can mobilize some support for us in your country. Regards, Prabhat bhumkal.blogspot.com AUGUST 13, 2008 1:14 PM Peter N. Jones said... Prabhat, Thank you for sending along this important information. A post on the Gond indigenous peoples is up - let us hope that this gets disseminated around so that more people become aware of what is happening. Peace. AUGUST 14, 2008 7:00 AM Anonymous said... Several things contributed to the Chittagong Hill Tribes's problems: (1) The prominant one is about Kaptai dam, built during Pakistan period. In reacting to this the tribals legitimately showed histaria but enthusiast foreign inspiration especially from Juric Univesity helped the Chakma tribal leadership to hijak the issue by the more marxist elements of the Chakma groups. The Chakma leadership romantacized the problem and took the issue as a matter of class struggle and recommended to its tribal followers (a)to fight for the independence of Chittagong Hill Tracts (b)lived by 50% tribals and 45%Bengalis. On top of this lack of reality check, written records show (c)all these tribes took shelter in Chittagong Hill Tracts to escape Burmease invasion of Arakan. The last one, the Rakhines took shelter in 1784. (d)The total Tribal population is even less than a million. (2)Rmanticizing with the independence idea created fear among Bangladeshi people. Further romanticizing continues today by almost every tribal groups, even small tribes as the Tanchangyas (2000 families) to change their name to Tanga (Burmese), and adapt Burmese script as their written language. (3)India took advantage of the alienation and helped arming the tribals. (4) To its effect now there is the loss of trust between Bengalis and the Tribals. Tribals instead of romancing with the wrong idea of Marxism, should learn the majority language and compete with Bengalis and enjoy the freedom given to everybody as being Bangladeshi. Such freedom is missing in the military ruled Burma and in the so-called secular Indian north East where groups like Mizoos, Asamese demanding independence are being massacred by droping bombs from the shy. It is too bad that the Chakma marxist leadership made more steps backward for all the tribes to now make the tribals in general suffer. AUGUST 18, 2008 11:12 PM Peter N. Jones said... Thanks for the contribution Abid. I've hotlinked it because it is really very informative. Issues of Dispute and Contemporary Problems in Chittagong Hill District. As it points out, the issues are much more complicated then many realize, and the biggest problem has been the lack of inclusion of indigenous concerns and voices. _______________ Endnotes (1) Alamgir Serajuddin, Asiatic Society Bangladesh, Vol. xxx (1), June, 1986. (2) Abid Bahar, “Dynamics of Ethnic Relations in Burmese Society:A Case Study of Interethnic Relations between the Burmese and the Rohingyas,”An Unpublished M.A. thesis, University of Windsor, Canada, 1981 (3) Chris Lewa, Issues to be Raised Concerning the Situation of Rohingya Children in Muanmar(Burma) Form- Asia, Nov. 2003. (4) Mohammad Ashraf Alam, A Short Historical Background of Arakan, Arakan Research Society, Chittagong, Bangladesh, October 2006, http://www.rohingya.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=20&Itemid=30 Also see Muhammad Enanmul Haq and Abdul Karim Shahitya Visharad’s work “Bengali Literature in the Court of Arakan 1600-1700.” (5)Francis Buchanan, “A Comparative Vocabulary of Some of the Languages Spoken in the Burma Empire." Pp.40-57; Also “Francis Buchanon in South East Bengal (1798) His journey to Chittagong, the Chittagong Hill Tracts, Noakhali and Comilla.” Also in Michael Charney, “Buddhism in Araka: Theories of Historiography of the Religious Basis of Ethnonyms” in the Forgotten Kingdom of Arakan from Dhanyawadi to 1962. (5) Ibid, 1992, 79 (6 ) Harvey, 1947, 161; A Short historical background of Arakan, Internet site: http://www.rohingyatimes.i p.com/ history/history_maa.html, also see N. M. Habibullah,History of the Rohingyas,Bangladesh Co-operative book society Limited, 1995; De Barros. J. 1973. Da Asia: decadas III & IV. Lisboa: S. Carlos., Habibullah, A.B.M. 1945. ‘Arakan in the Pre-Mughal History of Bengal’ Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal (Letters 11). (7) Cited in M. Habibullah, History of the Rohingyas, Bangladesh, 1995, p. 27.M.S. Collins also cited in the book; see Abdul Haque Chawdhury, Chattagramer Ittihas Prosongo, (the old Society and Culture of Chittagong), part 11, 1975, p2., 16. (8 ) Harvey, 1947, p.181; (9) Charney, 1999, p.279 (10) Furnivall, 1957:29. (11) Aye Chan, Enclave, 2005; Also see abid Bahar, “Aye Chan’s Enclave Revisited,” 2007. (12) Rohingya Outcry (13) Moshe Yegar, The Muslims of Burma” A Study of a Minority Group, Otto Harrassowitz, Wiesbaden Moshe Yoger, 1972:67 (14) Mohammad Ashraf Alam, A Short Historical Background of Arakan (15) Aye Chan, 2005. (16) Moshe Yoger, 1972, p98. (17) Pakistan Times, August 26, 1959. (18) Pakistan Times 27th August 1959 (19) 1960 The Daily Guardian, Rangoon, 27th October 1960. (20) Abid Bahar, Tagore's Paradigm Exposed in "Dalia", June 03 2008, http://groups.google.com.vn/group/soc.culture.bengali/msg/80428f57a0e9a903, (21) Rohingya Outcry and Demands, Rohingya Patriotic Front (RPF), Arakan (Burma), 1976,. (22) Abid Bahar, Dynamics of Ethnic Relations in Burmese Society:A Case Study of Interethnic Relations between the Burmese and the Rohingyas,An Unpublished M.A. thesis, University of Windsor, Canada, 1981 (23) Ibid (24) Habib Siddiqui, What is Happening in Burma? http://www.albalagh.net/current_affairs/0090.shtml (25) U Khin Maung Saw,The Origins of the name “Rohingya” 06, 11, 2005 ; Sara Smith Faked History, Burma Digest, 28, 11, 2005. (26) Aye Chan, “The Development of a Muslim Enclave in Arakan (Rakhine) State of Burma (Myanmar)" in U Shw Zan and Aye Chan’s Influx Viruses, The Illegal Muslims in Arakan, ((New York, Arakanese in United States, Planetarium Station 2005), 14-33. The book was published in the United States. It was also published on line website.http://www.rakhapura.com, 2005, accessed on November 20, 2005. (27) Banglanari, Yahoo group, January, 19, 2006, fight4rightnow@y... banglarnari@yahoogroups.com, -------------------------------- ( This article was originally published as “Burmese Invasion of Arakan and the Rise of Non-Bengali Settlements in Chittagong of Bangladesh,” February 15 2006. It was was also published in the author’s book, Burma’s Missing Dots, chapter 6, Flapwing Publishers, 2009. A post script on contemporary developments is also added with the present article) Abid Bahar, Canada E MIal : abidbahar@yahoo.com   http://newsfrombangladesh.net/view.php?hidRecord=281950

__._,_.___

[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: Bangladesh lost a true friend:Ted Kennedy

Dear Alochok Shamim

All democrats join you Shamim in paying respect to this great man.

But respect for Edward Kennedy is in abundance and he would be happier if we could apply his life in some way to improving the condition of our country. Applauding greatness is good and easy. Learning from greatness is better and difficult. I join you and all Bangladeshi politcial activists in chosing the easier option.

Care to mention what our politcians have learnt from Edward Kennedy since his visit some four decades ago? You know what I'm going to write don't you?

For now though we pray for the eternal salvation of the Senator and thank him for a lifetime of working for the betterment of humanity.

Regards

Ezajur Rahman
Kuwait

--- In alochona@yahoogroups.com, Shamim Chowdhury <veirsmill@...> wrote:
>
> I pay my humble respect to this great world icon, a political lion
> named Ted Kennedy.
> Farewell Ted, a true friend of Bangladesh.
> Sincerely
> Shamim Chowdhury
> Maryland, USA
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 'Bangladesh lost a true friend'
>
>  
>
>  
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Wed, Aug 26th, 2009 11:23 pm BdST
>
>  
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Dhaka, Aug 17 (bdnews24.com)--Senator Edward Kennedy was a supporter of Bangladesh's liberation war, when the US administration opposed it; the country lost a true friend with his demise, former foreign secretary Faruk Chowdhury told bdnews24.com.
>
> "Edward Kennedy brought the woes of the Bangladeshi refugees during the liberation war in 1971 before the eyes of the world," said Chowdhury as he paid his tribute.
>
> The senator also submitted a report to the US senate on the plight of the Bengali refugees in India, added the former bureaucrat.
>
> "I am saddened at the death. He will remain always in every Bengali's heart for his deeds."
>
> Edward, brother of John F Kennedy, died at the age of 77 early Wednesday (BdST), at his home in Boston, Massachusetts, after a long battle with cancer.
>
> One of the most influential and longest-serving senators in US history, who came to be known as the "Lion of the Senate", Edward Kennedy took the helm of one of America's most fabled political families after his brothers' assassinations.
>
> Prime minister Sheikh Hasina and leader of the opposition Khaleda Zia issued condolence messages on Wednesday, recalling his role in mobilising world opinion for Bangladesh.
>
> "The people of Bangladesh will remember his contribution forever," said Hasina.
>
> She expressed her deep sympathy for the members of the Kennedy family, the US government and people.
>
> Khaleda Zia said the late senator was "a humanist and democratic personality".
>
> "The people of Bangladesh will remember him forever for the role he played in mobilising world opinion in favour of Bangladesh liberation war".
>
> 'Champion of human values'
>
> Foreign minister Dipu Moni, in a statement, said Kennedy's ability to work across the political divide had earned him respect from all across the globe, not his name.
>
> "His absence will be felt not only in the United States, but far beyond".
>
> In Bangladesh, Dipu Moni said, Kennedy would be rated as a "legend and a true champion of freedom, liberty and human values".
>
> "Senator Kennedy will be particularly remembered in Bangladesh for his unqualified support to our struggle for freedom and his empathy for the distressed millions in the refugee camps in 1971.
>
> Kennedy personally supported the struggle of the Bengalis when the US administration sided with the Pakistanis.
>
> "He went to the post-war refugee camps in Bangladesh on February 14-15, 1972 and visited mass graves to pay homage for our martyrs," Faruk Chowdhury, who was chief of protocol in the newly born nation that year, told bdnews24.com.
>
> He described Kennedy's arrival in the old airport: "Commerce minister M R Siddiquee along with his wife were present at the airport to welcome Edward Kennedy. He came with his wife Jenny Kennedy."
>
> "Kennedy was on the first list of our foreign friends, who visited Bangladesh soon after independence," he said.
>
> "Kennedy met with then the prime minister Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman on February 14 at Ganabhaban. The next day he visited president justice Abu Sayed Chowdhury at the Bangabhaban."
>
> Having accompanied Kennedy during his two-day trip to Bangladesh, Chowdhury remembers his schedule to this day.
>
> "Kennedy went to Kushtia as a foreign friend of our liberation struggle. He the war refugees there, talked to them and witnessed their sufferings."
>
> "He also went to visit injured freedom fighters at Dhaka Medical College Hospital," he added.
>
> Twilight of a political dynasty
>
> When he first took the Senate seat, previously held by his brother John, in 1962, he was seen as something of a political lightweight with a famous name.
>
> Yet during his nearly half century in the chamber, Kennedy became known as one of Washington's most effective senators, crafting legislation by working with lawmakers and presidents of both parties, and finding unlikely allies.
>
> At the same time, he held fast to liberal causes helping to enact measures to protect civil and labour rights, expand healthcare, upgrade schools, increase student aid and contain the spread of nuclear weapons.
>
> Kennedy's death marked the twilight of a political dynasty and dealt a blow to Democrats, who felt they had "lost their patriarch" as tributes poured in from global leaders on Wednesday.
>
> bdnews24.com/sm/fwc/bd/rah/2256h.
>
> WARNING: Any unauthorised use or reproduction of bdnews24.com content for commercial purposes is strictly prohibited and constitutes copyright infringement liable to legal action.
> =========================================================
> =========================================================
>
> Legendary loss:Sen. Ted Kennedy's death puts family dynasty
> in doubt
> The Death of Ted Kennedy: The Brother
> Who Mattered Most
>  
>
>
>
>
> AFP â€" US President Barack Obama(R), seen here with Senator Edward Kennedy, seen here in April 2009, said Wednesday …
>
>
> Play Video Video:Sen. Ted Kennedy Dies at 77 ABC News
> Play Video Video:Carter: Kennedy Was Open and Honest ABC News
> Play Video Video:Reflecting on Sen. Ted Kennedy's Legacy ABC News
> By RICHARD LACAYO Richard Lacayo â€" Wed Aug 26, 10:25 am ET
>
> There was a time 40 years ago, right after the assassination of his brother Robert, when it looked like Edward Kennedy would become President someday by right of succession. The Kennedy curse, the one that had seen all three of his brothers cut down in their prime, had created for him a sort of Kennedy prerogative, or at least the illusion of one, an inevitable claim on the White House. For years he seemed like a man simply waiting for the right moment to take what everybody knew was coming his way.
>
>  
> Everybody was wrong. Ted Kennedy would never reach the White House. His weaknesses - and the long shadow of Chappaquiddick - were an obstacle that even his strengths couldn't overcome. But his failure to get to the presidency opened the way to the true fulfillment of his gifts, which was to become one of the greatest legislators in American history. When their White House years are over, most Presidents set off on the long aftermath of themselves. They give lectures, write books, play golf and make money. Jimmy Carter even won a Nobel Prize. But every one of them would tell you that elder-statesmanship is no substitute for real power.(See pictures of Edward's Kennedy's Life and Times.)
>
>  
> Because Kennedy never made it to the finish line, he never had to endure a post-presidential twilight. Instead, by the time of his death on Aug. 25 in Hyannis Port at the age of 77, he had 46 working years in Congress, time enough to leave his imprint on everything from the Voting Rights Act of 1965 to the Edward M. Kennedy Serve America Act of 2009, a law that expands support for national community-service programs. Over the years, Kennedy was a force behind the Freedom of Information Act, the Occupational Safety and Health Act, and the Americans with Disabilities Act. He helped Soviet dissidents and fought apartheid. Above all, he conducted a four-decade crusade for universal health coverage, a poignant one toward the end as the country watched a struggle with a brain tumor. But along the way, he vastly expanded the network of neighborhood clinics, virtually invented the COBRA system for portable insurance and helped create the laws that provide
> Medicare prescriptions and family leave.
>
>  
> And for most of that time, he went forward against great odds, the voice of progressivism in a conservative age. When people were getting tired of hearing about racism or the poor or the decay of American cities, he kept talking. When liberalism was flickering, there was Kennedy, holding the torch, insisting that "we can light those beacon fires again." In the last year of his life, with the inauguration of Barack Obama, he had the satisfaction of seeing a big part of that dream fulfilled. In early 2008, when Obama had just begun to capture the public imagination, Kennedy bucked the party establishment. Just before Super Tuesday, the venerable Senator from Massachusetts enthusiastically endorsed the young Senator from Illinois, helping propel Obama to the Democratic nomination and ultimately the White House. (See pictures of Barack Obama behind the scenes on Inauguration Day.)
>
>  
> So does it matter that Kennedy never made it to the presidency? Any number of mere Presidents have been pretty much forgotten. But as the Romans understood, there can be Emperors of no consequence - and Senators whose legacies are carved in stone.
>
> ***************
>
> Rose Kennedy wanted a family. Joe Kennedy wanted a dynasty. They both got what they wanted, but only for a time. Joe had made a fortune in film production, liquor, real estate and stocks. But he wasn't just a businessman. In the scope of his ambitions and schemes, he was something out of Shakespeare. He married Rose in 1914, and as their children arrived, he formed the conviction not only that the boys belonged in public life but that one of them, maybe more than one, should be President of the United States.
>
>  
> This was the atmosphere that Ted was born into on Feb. 22, 1932 - the last of the nine Kennedy children. But from the start, he had three elder brothers as a buffer between himself and the worst of the old man's ambition for his sons. All the same, he grew up at some distance from his parents. Over the years, Joe and Rose had become increasingly estranged. Overweight and lonely, Ted was shuttled through a succession of boarding and day schools, but he grew into an athletic, good-looking teenager, one who ambled into Harvard, where Jack and Bobby had gone before him.
>  
>
> He hadn't been at Harvard long before he screwed up in a way that would come back to haunt him years later. In his freshman year, Kennedy was having trouble with a Spanish class. There was a test coming up, and he needed to do well in order to be eligible to play varsity football the next year. With the encouragement of some of his buddies, Kennedy recruited a friend who was good at Spanish to take the exam in his place. The scheme backfired. The surrogate was caught, and both boys were expelled, though Harvard offered them the opportunity to be readmitted later if they showed evidence of "constructive and responsive citizenship."
>  
>
> Read TIME's 10 Questions with Ted Kennedy.
>
> Read "Teddy & Kennedyism."
>  
>
> Kennedy's abrupt next move was to join the Army, which sent him to Georgia to be trained as a military police officer and then, thanks to his father's intervention, to Paris to serve as an honor guard at NATO headquarters. In the fall of 1953, he was readmitted to Harvard, where he majored in government. After graduation, he went on to study law at the University of Virginia. He was in law school when he met Joan Bennett, a senior at Manhattanville College, a small Catholic school in New York State that his mother and two of his sisters had attended.
>  
> Not much more than a year after they first met, they married. Over the next nine years, they had three children: Kara, Edward Jr. and Patrick. (Joan also suffered three miscarriages.) But by 1982, the combination of her prolonged struggle with alcohol and his infidelities led them to divorce. Joan often found herself burdened by the effort required to fill the role of a Kennedy wife. Years later, sounding a bit like Princess Diana, she told an interviewer, "I didn't have a clue what I was getting into."
>  
>
> What she had gotten into was the Kennedys, a family whose family business was politics. Ted was still in law school when he was made campaign manager for Jack's 1958 bid for a second term as Senator. Though the real decision-making was left to seasoned Kennedy operatives, the campaign put Ted in the field constantly to meet and greet voters. It prepared him for a future, coming soon, in which he would be the candidate. When Jack was elected to the White House in 1960, there were four years remaining in his Senate term. The family wanted Ted to succeed him, but at 28, he was two years below the minimum age for the Senate. So a Kennedy loyalist was chosen to fill the seat for a couple of years while Ted used the time to make himself plausible to the state's voters as a man they should send to Washington. With Jack's help, he attached himself to a Senate fact-finding trip to Africa. He toured Latin America, Israel and Berlin. On Election Day, with 54% of
> the vote, Kennedy beat George Cabot Lodge, a descendant of the Waspiest of New England political dynasties. (Read "Kennedy's Absence Felt on Health-Care Reform.")
>  
>
> Ted had been in the Senate for less than a year when J.F.K. went to Dallas the day Lee Harvey Oswald was lying in wait. Jack's death was more than a personal tragedy for Ted. It was a watershed. It put him one step closer to assuming the Kennedy burden, the perennial quest for the heights. It marked the beginning of his transformation into a true public figure. As a first measure, Ted devoted himself to ensuring the passage of legislation that had been important to his brother, especially the civil rights bill J.F.K. introduced the summer before his death. On June 19, Ted added his vote to the 73-to-27 majority that turned that bill into the historic Civil Rights Act of 1964. Then he headed to the airport to board a private plane that was to take him to the state Democratic Party convention in Springfield, Mass. But as the plane made its descent into a fogbound Springfield airport, it struck a row of trees and somersaulted across an orchard. The pilot,
> Ed Zimny, died at the scene. A Kennedy aide, Ed Moss, died a few hours later. Indiana Senator Birch Bayh and his wife Marvella, who were also on board, survived with minor injuries. Kennedy suffered a broken back and a collapsed lung.
>  
>
> What followed was a five-month recovery, mostly spent immobilized in a hospital bed, and a lifetime of back pain. Yet when he returned to the Senate the following year, Kennedy set to work with the energy that comes to a man who gets a second chance at life. It wasn't long before Ted scored a victory on another of Jack's unrealized goals, the reform of immigration quotas to allow more arrivals from nations outside Northern Europe. One year later, he secured federal support for neighborhood clinics, marking the first time he applied himself to the problem of health care, the signature issue of his public life. (Read "Eunice Kennedy Shriver Dies at 88.")
>  
>
> By 1967, Kennedy had also begun to speak out against the Vietnam War. Exasperation about Vietnam was one of the main reasons his brother Robert decided to seek the presidency in 1968. Then Bobby was shot down as well. His death was a crucial moment of recognition for Ted that the burden of the Kennedy legacy was now his to shoulder. For years he had been the Prince Hal of the Kennedy dynasty, the wayward son who would just as soon not inherit the kingdom. But now, at 36, he was the last of the line. There was no one else.
>
>  
> So when Hubert Humphrey lost to Richard Nixon in the fall, Ted instantly became liberalism's last, best hope. There were people who thought he lacked Jack's intellect or Bobby's passion, that all his life he had merely trawled in their wake. But in his first speech after Bobby's death, he was already sounding the cry that would be the great theme of his political life: "Like my brothers before me, I pick up a fallen standard. Sustained by the memory of our priceless years together, I shall try to carry forward that special commitment to justice, to excellence, to courage, that distinguished their lives." (See pictures of TIME covering Watergate.)
>
> This was the moment when everyone assumed that the presidency would someday be his for the asking. But it was only a moment. On July 18, 1969, Kennedy hosted a reunion for six women who had worked at the center of Bobby's presidential campaign. The gathering took place in a rented cottage on Chappaquiddick Island, just off Martha's Vineyard. Around 11:15 that night, Kennedy asked his driver for the keys to his Oldsmobile so that he could leave the party with Mary Jo Kopechne, 28, a former aide to his brother. According to testimony he gave later at a judge's inquest, he took a wrong turn onto an unlit dirt road and then across a small, unrailed wooden bridge. His car went over the side of the bridge and landed upside down in the water. Kennedy managed to escape. Kopechne did not.
>  
> There are questions about Chappaquiddick that have never been closed. Where was Kennedy going with Kopechne at that late hour? (At the inquest in January, he claimed that he was taking her back to her hotel in Edgartown.) Why did he wait until the following morning, 10 hours later, to report the accident to the police? (He said it was because he had been in a state of shock and confusion.) Was the real reason for delaying the report that at the time of the accident he was drunk? (He insisted he was not.) At the inquest, he testified that after escaping from the car, he dived back into the water seven or eight times in a vain attempt to free Kopechne. Then he made the mile-and-a-half walk back to the cottage, where the party was still underway, collected two male friends and returned with them to the car, where they also attempted to free Kopechne. When that proved impossible, Kennedy decided to return to his hotel across the water in Edgartown. But
> instead of summoning the night ferry, he chose to swim 500 feet across the bay.
>  
> The inquest concluded that Kennedy had lied when he said he was taking Kopechne back to Edgartown. It also ruled that his "negligent driving" appeared to have contributed to her death. By the time the inquest was complete, Kennedy had already entered a guilty plea to leaving the scene of an accident and received a two-month suspended sentence. But it would be truer to say he was sentenced to life under the cloud of Chappaquiddick.
>  
> Had it not been for that night, he almost certainly would have been a candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination in 1972. He stayed on the sidelines that year and in 1976 as well, even though in the aftermath of Watergate, that looked to be a winning year for the Democrats. It would be, but for Jimmy Carter.
> See TIME's Pictures of the Week.
> (See the top 10 medical breakthroughs of 2008.)
>  
>
> Kennedy found new issues to throw himself into. In 1970 he introduced his first bill to establish a system of universal health-care coverage. He confounded people who thought of him as a doctrinaire liberal by pushing for airline deregulation and for required sentencing of convicted criminals. He promoted arms-control talks with the Soviet Union but also devoted himself to the cause of Soviet dissidents and would-be Jewish ÉmigrÉs.
>  
> It was Chappaquiddick as much as anything else that sabotaged his most serious attempt at the White House: his fight in 1980 to push Carter aside. Almost three decades later, that campaign is still a bit of a puzzle. His ideological differences with Carter never seemed great enough to justify a challenge to a sitting President of his own party. His main complaint was that Carter wasn't moving forward fast enough on health care, "the great unfinished business on the agenda of the Democratic Party," as he called it. In a televised interview on Nov. 4, 1979, just three days before he would launch his campaign, Kennedy gave CBS News correspondent Roger Mudd a notoriously rambling answer to the simple question "Why do you want to be President?" The man who had spent years on a trajectory to the White House still couldn't say exactly why.
>  
> In the end, Kennedy won 10 primaries. Carter took 24, then sailed into the propellers of Ronald Reagan in the fall. But that failed campaign liberated Kennedy. He gave the best speech of his life at the 1980 Democratic National Convention, the speech of a man who had no intention of exiting the public stage. Because the White House was never again a serious option for him, he was free to concentrate once and for all on legislating. (Read "The All-American President: Ronald Wilson Reagan.")
>  
> It was the dawn of the Reagan Revolution, and the Republicans had just retaken the Senate - not an easy time to be the torchbearer for liberalism. But Kennedy assumed the role gladly. He became not only a dogged defender of the faith but also an even more adept player of the congressional game. In the '80s, he teamed repeatedly with the unlikeliest of allies, conservative Utah Republican Orrin Hatch. It was Hatch and Kennedy who got the first major AIDS legislation passed in 1988, a $1 billion spending measure for treatment, education and research. Two years later, they pushed through the Ryan White CARE Act to assist people with HIV who lack sufficient health-care coverage. But if Kennedy knew how to play ball with the other side, he also knew how to play hardball. When Reagan tried to put Robert Bork on the Supreme Court, it was Kennedy who led the ferocious and ultimately successful liberal opposition.
>  
> Kennedy wasn't nearly as prominent in the next major battle over a court seat, the 1991 nomination of Clarence Thomas by George H.W. Bush. Even in the best of times, Kennedy's reputation for womanizing would have made it awkward for him to sit in judgment when Thomas was accused by Anita Hill of sexual harassment. But the Senate hearings on Thomas started at a particularly bad moment for Kennedy, just months after one of the messiest episodes in his public life. In March, while visiting the family compound in Palm Beach, Fla., Kennedy had roused his son Patrick and his nephew William Kennedy Smith out of bed so they could join him for drinks at a local bar. Smith returned to the compound that night with a young woman who would later accuse him of raping her. He was eventually acquitted after a nationally televised trial in which Kennedy was called as a witness. But the image of the capering Senator leading two younger men out to play reawakened all the
> old misgivings about Kennedy, women and alcohol. The man who had once been Prince Hal, the reluctant heir to the throne, was in danger of turning into Falstaff, the aging reprobate.
> Kennedy pulled himself back from that brink. In the summer of the same year, a decade after his divorce from Joan, Kennedy re-encountered Victoria Reggie, a 37-year-old lawyer and gun-safety advocate who had briefly been an intern in his Senate office. Now she lived in Washington with her two children from a previous marriage. Soon they were dating, and a year later they were married. The new marriage transformed Kennedy, giving him a feeling of contentment and stability he had not enjoyed for years. It was a newly energized Kennedy who moved on to the legislative accomplishments of the '90s, like the Family and Medical Leave Act. When the Republicans retook Congress in 1994, it was Kennedy who would push Bill Clinton from the left when Clinton's old soul mates from the Democratic Leadership Council were urging him to move right. "The last thing this country needs," he said then, "is two Republican Parties." (See pictures of Bill Clinton's North Korea
> Rescue Mission.)
>  
> Yet when the next President turned out to be a Republican, Kennedy still found a way to work with him on shared goals. Kennedy spearheaded the effort to pass the No Child Left Behind Act, a priority for George W. Bush. But they later parted ways over what Kennedy felt was Bush's failure to adequately fund the program. And on other issues, there could be no common ground. In 2002, Kennedy was one of the 23 Senators who voted against authorizing the Iraq war. Years later, he would call it the "best vote" he ever cast in the Senate.
>  
> But by that time, there had been a lot of good votes - votes that left the country a changed place and a better one. Nobody talks about Camelot anymore. They struck the scenery long ago. Without Ted, the Kennedy legacy would be mostly beautiful afterglow, just mood music and high rhetoric. More than either of his brothers, he took the mythology and shaped it into something real and enduring.
>  
> On the weekend of his Inauguration in 1961, John Kennedy gave Ted, the last born of the Kennedy siblings, an engraved cigarette box. It read, "And the last shall be first." That was almost 50 years ago. Neither of them knew then in just what ways that prophecy might turn out to be true.
> We do.
> View this article on Time.com
> Related articles on Time.com:
>
> Obama on Kennedy: "An Important Chapter In Our History Has Come To An End"
> Teddy: The Youngest Kennedy Brother
> The Man Who Found Himself
> The Death of Ted Kennedy: The Brother Who Mattered Most
> World Reaction
>

------------------------------------

[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.comYahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/alochona/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/alochona/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:alochona-digest@yahoogroups.com
mailto:alochona-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
alochona-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

[ALOCHONA] Re: Quarters at home, abroad trying to block war crimes trial: AL

Dear Alochok Mahathir

In Bangladesh what is usual is often what is worst and what is usual requires the greatest spotlight.

AL's general secretary continues to refer to foreign enemies without naming them. Two weeks ago, in the first BDR gathering since 25/2 the BDR generals referred to foreign enemies without naming them. BNP would do the same.

We are such a respectable nation. If we knew which country had dropped a nuclear bomb on us we would be too polite to refer to that country in our complaints. Assuming we'd complain!

Internally, and even more bizarrely, we like to refer to 'certain quarters'. Certain quarters! Certain idiots!

Our soldiers are useful thousands of miles away because over there they know who the enemy is! Back home everyone is walking around wondering 'Ke marlo? Ke korlo?'....... for decades!

Look at the the silence of our Foreign Minister at the plight of Aung San Suu Kyi! Hey guys! May be if we all keep very quiet Burma will think India is it Western neighbour!

So here is the government saying it has foreign obstacles to the trial of people contributed to the murder of lacs of our people!!!

Some government! Some independence!

Ezajur Rahman
Kuwait

--- In alochona@yahoogroups.com, Mahathir of BD <wouldbemahathirofbd@...> wrote:
>
> what's unusal in it?
>
>
> Bangladesh is the seventh largest country in the world . Do we Bangladeshi realize that ?
>
> --- On Mon, 8/24/09, Ezajur Rahman <ezajur.rahman@...> wrote:
>
>
> From: Ezajur Rahman <ezajur.rahman@...>
> Subject: [ALOCHONA] Quarters at home, abroad trying to block war crimes trial: AL
> To: alochona@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Monday, August 24, 2009, 5:17 AM
>
>
>  
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Quarters at home, abroad trying
> to block war crimes trial: Ashraf
> Courtesy New Age 24/8/09
> Staff Correspondent
>  
> The ruling Awami League general secretary, Syed Ashraful Islam, on Wednesday conceded that the government was facing obstacles â€" both from forces at home and abroad â€" to its initiatives to put the war criminals on trial but stopped short of naming the quarters.
>    ‘We are aware that some quarters at home and abroad are trying to block trial of the war criminals but I do not want to disclose their names at the moment…We are trying to overcome the barrier,’ he said at a discussion at the National Press Club.
>    Sampradaikata, Jangibad Birodhi Mancha organised the discussion on ‘Militancy and present Bangladesh : our responsibility’, presided over by professor Ajay Roy.
>    Ashraf, also the LGRD and cooperatives minister, said the government would be able to overcome the obstacle when there was a consensus among the countrymen over the issue. Ashraf urged the pro-liberation political parties, young generation, different organisations and professional bodies, media, civil society and people from all walks of life to mobilise public opinion for trial of the war criminals.
>    Reiterating the government’s stand on the issue, the AL leader said trial of war criminals was the party’s election pledge and the government had allocated Tk 10 crore for the process in the budget.
>    Ashraf said the government had no alternative to holding war crimes trial and that the first session of the ninth parliament had passed a resolution paving the way for trial of those who had been involved in various war crimes during the war of independence in 1971. ‘The people also gave their mandate for trial of the war criminals in the December 29 parliamentary polls,’ he said.
>    ‘The government is trying to mobilise opinion both at home and abroad in favour of holding war crimes trial but only the government’s initiatives are not enough in this regard and all will have to come forward in support of the initiatives,’ he said.
>    ‘Trial of the war criminals is not the government’s own demand, it is the demand of every man of conscience…’
>    Ashraf said the Sector Commanders’ Forum, an organisation of the sector commanders of the 1971 war of independence, had mounted a campaign over the issue before the elections but now they were silent. He urged the forum to resume their activities.
>    He also called on Sampradaikata o Jangibad Birodhi Mancha to organise discussions in every district to mobilize public opinion in this regard.
>    The discussion was also addressed by Dhaka city AL general secretary Mofazzal Hossain Chowdhury Maya, AL’s health and population affairs secretary Badiuzzaman Bhuiyan, Gana Forum leader Pankaj Bhattachariya, Workers Party leader Bimal Biswas, Bangladesh Economics Association general secretary Abul Barakat, Dhaka University professor Syed Anwar Hossain, Swechchhasebak League leader Pankaj Devnath, rights activist Rokeya Kabir, retired major general Amin Ahmed Chowdhury and Dhaka Reporters Unity general secretary Pathik Shah.
>  
>

------------------------------------

[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.comYahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/alochona/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/alochona/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:alochona-digest@yahoogroups.com
mailto:alochona-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
alochona-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [ALOCHONA] AL move to end caretaker system gains momentum

SH can u tell me please where it was 110%  casted vote plz rtegards Habib --- On Sat, 8/29/09, Jamil Ahmed <jamil_dhaka@yahoo.com> wrote: From: Jamil Ahmed <jamil_dhaka@yahoo.com> Subject: Re: [ALOCHONA] AL move to end caretaker system gains momentum To: alochona@yahoogroups.com Date: Saturday, August 29, 2009, 11:43 AM   In bangladesh everything comes to an end suddenly. That's our culture. Democracy, decency and smooth transfer of power are  foreign concept.     --- On Thu, 8/27/09, Enam Haque <enam28@yahoo. com> wrote: From: Enam Haque <enam28@yahoo. com> Subject: Re: [ALOCHONA] AL move to end caretaker system gains momentum To: alochona@yahoogroup s.com Date: Thursday, August 27, 2009, 12:24 AM In Bangladesh, it is simply impossible to transfer power under the political government - whether it is BAL or BNP. We need to continue with the caretaker system for long. BAL failed the test in the Upazilla election under the current EC.   --- On Tue, 8/25/09, Sajjad Hossain <shossain456@ yahoo.com> wrote: From: Sajjad Hossain <shossain456@ yahoo.com> Subject: Re: [ALOCHONA] AL move to end caretaker system gains momentum To: alochona@yahoogroup s.com Date: Tuesday, August 25, 2009, 9:17 PM   The timing of writing a piece in favour of abolishing the Caretaker System by Afsan Chowdhury is particularly interesting. He is nothing but the "hired Bhudhijibi" of the Awami Camp. He just re-iterated his Masters voice.   Now, 'democracy is for the fully grown adults." Insteresting! Since 1996 to 2007, according to Ms Majid our politicians were children. As soon as with the help of pro-Awami Election Commission, when Awami League ascended to the Throne, now they have become adult including 59 years Sheikh Hasina and 64 years Begum Zia. I did not know that in Bangladesh someone needs to wait that long to be an adult.   Free and fair election. Yes, can be organized but not by the Election Commission under Dr Huda which scored a world record of 87% vote casting in a national election; in many cases with 110% vote casting. SH Toronto From: Farida Majid <farida_majid@ hotmail.com> To: Alochona Alochona <alochona@yahoogroup s.com> Sent: Tuesday, August 25, 2009 3:50:47 PM Subject: RE: [ALOCHONA] AL move to end caretaker system gains momentum      The childish reasoning of this person is to be noted with inyerest.  Children need caretaking, since they know not how to act responsibly. Democracy is for fully grown adults.         . . . . Simply put, Bangladeshi parties don't have the political maturity, intent or will to have free and fair elections when in power. The Election Commission can do a much better job and by strengthening the commission much can be improved and even moved towards a system where the caretaker government will not be required. .....                             Afsan Chowdhury got it right.               farida majid To: alochona@yahoogroup s.com From: shossain456@ yahoo.com Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2009 13:04:28 -0700 Subject: Re: [ALOCHONA] AL move to end caretaker system gains momentum   If next time BNP comes to power due to touch of some miracle, you would see Awami League on the street again to re-introduce the Caretaker Government System. Same "Budhijibis" will turn their arguments 180 degrees around. SH Toronto From: Ezajur Rahman <ezajur.rahman@ q8.com> To: alochona@yahoogroup s.com Sent: Monday, August 24, 2009 5:43:42 AM Subject: [ALOCHONA] AL move to end caretaker system gains momentum   AL move to end caretaker system gains momentum The system of non-party supervision of elections is a product of our political parties and their immaturity and absolute inability to come to power through fair and public participatory methods. The situation could be worth changing if the situation had improved but, remarkable as it may seem, our political parties have remained as unable to be part of a democratic process as they were two decades back in 1990, writes Afsan Chowdhury Courtesy New Age 24/8/09 AWAMI League leaders of the middle variety as well as a few of the top ones – or should we say ex-top ones – have recently started to deride the caretaker government system which has been in place for almost two decades. It is stated to have been an experiment that has lived out its purpose and time, and is ready to be discarded.    The Awami League has, of course, said that it is not a decision and that the issue should be debated and even the Election Commission should be part of the debate but the intentions are clear – it does not want the caretaker government system anymore.    The caretaker government system was introduced as an interim measure in 1990 after the fall of Ershad following the mass movement. The movement had been on for nearly a decade against the somewhat feeble regime of Ershad because the two contenting parties – the Bangladesh Nationalist Party and the Awami League – were so antagonistic to each other that they never even managed to get together to fight their common enemy jointly, allowing Ershad to go on for so long.    Once Ershad had fallen, there was no succession and so the concept of 'neutral caretaker government' under Justice Shahabuddin Ahmed, then the chief justice of the Supreme Court, took over, a concept born out of necessity. It was supposed to be an interim, short-term arrangement in view of the complete lack of trust of the political parties in each other at that time. The arrangement worked the first time but trust in each other never increased. The arrangement was incorporated into the constitution in 1996.    The arrangement was never popular but everyone accepted it because it was convenient for the two warring parties during an election. The neutral tag of the caretaker government soon disappeared as the interim members of the government were largely split between representatives of both the parties but it swayed and rolled on till in 2006-7 when it faced its worst crisis when the BNP abused the mechanism to an absurd level. Its very transparent manipulation attempt exposed the fact that even this system could itself cause a crisis. That such action by politicians can hurt the system so badly that political options can disappear from the table leaving only violence behind. The inevitable result was the military-backed civilian takeover and the rest is well known. The Awami League had even then expressed unhappiness and now is doing so again. Why the sudden acceleration of dislike of the system which has brought them to power through the 2008 elections is not well understood. Meanwhile, the BNP has already expressed opposition to the idea as expected.    The system of non-party supervision of elections is a unique system in the world and product of our political parties and their immaturity and absolute inability to come to power through fair and public participatory methods. The situation could be worth changing if the situation had improved but, remarkable as it may seem, our political parties have remained as unable to be part of a democratic process as they were two decades back in 1990. The reason which had led to the birth of the neutral caretaker government system remains as valid as it was then. So what has changed since then that the Awami League is keen to replace it with a party-in-power- based election is not understood?    Speculation one – the Awami League wants to do a BNP in future, that is just as the BNP distorted the system to try to stay on in power in 2006 by manipulating the mechanism. It couldn't face the idea of handing over power after only a term and it was very unsure that it could win on a popular ticket. It was a desperate move that backfired on them.    The Awami League till now has been having a very bad time since elections and its performance is not winning vote points. Many of the problems it faces have grown over the years under both party regimes and by ignoring such issue they have now become huge and perhaps unmanageable. If the Awami League can't handle them, unpopularity is inevitable and that may translate into an electoral disaster the next time. The party may not want to risk a free and fair election under the present system. Hence, it wants to do away with it and reduce risk unlike the BNP which wanted to keep the system but manipulate it.    Speculation two – the Awami League believes that the time is right for making a move that will further push the BNP into a corner. The BNP doesn't resemble a winner's party anymore and the tag of corruption and support to terrorist elements is a major burden for the BNP. It does have a degree of dependence on these elements for its political clout but, as the regional concern for extremist violence grows, the Awami League may find itself as a facilitator of clamping down on such forces. The Bangladesh Jamaat-e-Islami, the BNP's main ally, is basically a Pakistan-based party of its ancestors, and its brothers in Pakistan aren't doing too well as all extremists get lumped together there as 'enemies' as the fight against the Taliban expands. These parties while varying in their extremism are all ideologically anti-Indian and if that is an ideology, then it will soon become involved in regional politics, if not terrorism. Should the security scenario become more dangerous, there may be a nod to the Awami League to at act tough against such elements and both the BNP and Jamaat may be at the receiving end of the AL stick with regional and global support behind it. So if the Awami League emerges as the only goods on the political shelf the neutral caretaker government system will lose relevance.    Speculation three – the Awami League knows that the BNP is weakened and after the war crimes trials which will be held most probably even if in a diminished manner, both the BNP and Jamaat will be on the back foot and the Awami League will be able to push through a series of changes suiting its politics. If the BNP can be shown to have consorted too closely with Jamaat, which is certain to be linked with war crimes, if not tried as such, the Awami League will hope to cut down the level of street opposition and push its new plan. The time may be right according to them.    These may well be what the Awami League is thinking and it doesn't matter if they are speculation or not but the fact of the matter is, the Awami League is on the move to cut down a system which, given our political performance, should stay much longer. The people of Bangladesh have shown that they have political maturity but the BNP's action during its last regime and the Awami League's action since coming to power in its last incarnation can hardly make anyone think that Bangladesh has reached a state of political stability under which fair elections will be or can be held.    Of course there are two factors that can make or unmake the argument. One is the function of the Election Commission and the other is the role of the army.    It can be argued that the caretaker government is not necessary as the Election Commission is strengthened enough. This is a key question but there have been doubts about the level of power the commission enjoys and if those powers actually allow it to supervise the entire electoral process and the conducting of related business. The tirade of the BNP politician Salahuddin Quader Chowdhury against the commission after it declared him guilty of misinforming it about his educational qualifications the people and his refusal to resign followed by threats are indicators that the commission is still far short of the powers that would give it the kind of clout needed to ensure a free and fair election even when a party is in power.    Apart from that, given the history of our politics, there is little evidence that the government will make the Election Commission so strong and independent that it can call the shots in an election no matter who rules the roost. Since our political parties have, in fact, systematically weakened the judiciary and the political institutions, it would take an unrealistic optimist to think that our parties will make any institution stronger than the party in power. In that case, we would not need the caretaker government but right now the Election Commission is nowhere near empowered to make a difference that will see an unpopular government thrown out by the voters even if in power.    Right now the most organised and strengthened institution in the country is the army and it is their tilt to a proper election managed by the Election Commission saw the results that we have now. It's no secret that the ex-army chief General Moeen's actions in this regard hurt the BNP which is why the plethora of cases and condemnations of this man by BNP leaders. However, still now, it's the military guarantee that ensures civilian rule. That will be so in the future unless some major incident occurs or any new factor is introduced. Is the Awami League hoping that the military will also support this move to end caretaker government thinking that the army has gone pro-Awami League?    The army wears olive uniforms and not the black coat of the Awami League and its support to the Awami League was strategic given in the best interest of self-preservation. If the AL decision to end the caretaker government system makes it unpopular, a generator of instability and again returns the kind of situation which forced the army to act as protector of the state and the army itself, the Awami League may find a friend missing, the friend that matters.    The decision to try to shift away from an established system that has provided and can provide stability, if both parties decide to respect it, is a matter of great concern. It seems that the Awami League has decided to do so and is now making dry runs but there is no evidence to suggest that it can be carried off because the BNP will certainly oppose it on the streets and the situation is not so strong for the Awami League that it can override them.    Simply put, Bangladeshi parties don't have the political maturity, intent or will to have free and fair elections when in power. The Election Commission can do a much better job and by strengthening the commission much can be improved and even moved towards a system where the caretaker government will not be required. But, to decide that, a system which is designed to protect the people from the political parties and their antagonism shouldn't be done away with simply because it looks a good time to act in a way that will ensure the favourite fantasy of Bangladeshi parties – endless rule.   Kuwait Petroleum International Limited P.O.Box:1819 Safat 13019 Kuwait. Tel.:(+965) 22332800 - Fax: (+965) 22332776 Registered in England, Registration Number 1734259. VAT Registration Number: GB 606 1853 52 Registered Office: Duke's Court, Duke Street, Woking, Surrey GU21 5BH United Kingdom. A wholly owned Subsidiary Company of Kuwait Petroleum Corporation, Kuwait The information in this email and any attachment are confidential and may also be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, please inform the sender and delete this message and any attachment from your system. If you are not the intended recipient you must not copy this message or use it for any purpose or disclose the contents to any other person. Windows Live: Make it easier for your friends to see what you're up to on Facebook. Find out more. start: 0000-00-00 end: 0000-00-00

__._,_.___

[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

__,_._,___