Here are two statements, one from Dhaka university Teachers’ association leader prof Anowar Hossain, who has recently been arrested and the other one by the de-facto CTG spokesperson, Advisor Mr Moinul Hossain.
Prof Anwar says sorry to army
Staff CorrespondentThe detained general secretary of Dhaka University Teachers Association (Duta) yesterday apologised to the army for the attack on them during the recent campus violence.
Also the dean of bioscience, Anwar Hossain made the public apology before the newsmen while being taken to the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate’s Court, Dhaka.
“As general secretary of the teachers association and a guardian of the students I regret the incident that must have caused pain and hurt to every single member of the ranks ranging from a soldier to the army chief,” he continued.
“From the heart, we offer our apologies for the incident. And we don’t feel any shame, or anguish to do so,” added Prof Anwar.
“We are sorry for the humiliation and injury dealt to the reputation and esteem of the army personnel,” he observed.
“This army is the emblem of the state of Bangladesh, sovereignty and solidarity. And we can feel how much it pains an army personnel to watch an attack on their uniforms,” the detained DU professor told the reporters.
He also said, “We expect that every army man will accept the apologies, and forget the grievances they had suffered.”
And this is what the spokesperson this CTG had to say in his latest public speaking. He told this to BBC,
“….You have seen how they kicked a uniformed man belonging to the armed forces, how they burnt the effigy of the army chief. Its Ok as long as they criticize or burn the effigy of us, the civil leadership; but with what plan or how dare they kick a uniformed man or burn the effigy of the army chief?….”
You dare talk against the militray, they sure will beat the apology out of you. Just look at professor Anowar Hossain’s above mentioned apology. And even a a professor of Dhaka University is not exempt from the wrath of speaking against the military.
Moinul’s statement was far more dangerous. I am puzzled and still trying to grab what he actually meant. Isn’t the civil leadership still the supreme leadership and the authority over our state’s armed forces? Then how come, criticizing civil leadership may be OK, but criticizing the army chief is a big No No? Doesn’t our constitution protects you even if you criticize the God? Is Army, now, bigger than God for Bangladesh?
August 30, 2007 at 9:39 pm
[...] "You have seen how they kicked a uniformed man belonging to the armed forces, how they burnt the effigy of the army chief General Moeen U Ahmed. Its Ok as long as they criticize or burn the effigy of us, the civil leadership; but with what plan do they kick a uniformed man or burn the effigy of the army chief? I believe this is a very dangerous plan.” [translation based on Rumi Ahmed] [...]
August 31, 2007 at 3:41 am
[...] “You have seen how they kicked a uniformed man belonging to the armed forces, how they burnt the effigy of the army chief General Moeen U Ahmed. Its Ok as long as they criticize or burn the effigy of us, the civil leadership; but with what plan do they kick a uniformed man or burn the effigy of the army chief? I believe this is a very dangerous plan.” [translation based on Rumi Ahmed] [...]
July 16, 2008 at 4:43 am
Dear Fellows, I find myself in agreement with the notion that Military intervention in whatever form in Bangladesh has (without exception) harmed the national interest as well as the Armed Forces as institutions. But I am totally unable to understand how you the students (the most conscience sagment of the nation) find kicking an individual soldier in Uniform (a highest form of insult to individual or collective military pride)as anything near to legitimate expression of Grievance.
Struggle to democracy in a country must distingush between a protest and thuggery. Are we to do away with a proud and professional Arned Forces in a future modern and truly democratic Bangladesh? Offcourse not. Your struggle for democracy must not be directed at individual Forces personnel but against the culture of Military Chauvanism and userpers of Military positions.
July 16, 2008 at 5:55 pm
Dear Major Reza,
Thank you for visiting and commenting on this site. I understand you point and agree with most of what you said.
To be fair, students in Bangladesh never want to get involved into conflicts with the armed forces. Army was used against students by dictators when students’ protested against government. Students protests never was aimed at the armed forces. Ever.
In the specific case you mention, as I understand that the man being kicked was a driver of an officer. All my sympathy for him. He should never have been beaten to start with. But these sort of things happen in conflict situations. And the conflict situation started because some senior generals dispatched a military platoon within a university campus.
And then what our professional military forces did? They went to the neighbourhood, cordoned off the area, rounded up all the studets and brutally tortured all of them. This is also not acceptable. And these sort of incidences fuel another future event like that of that picture.
Our students do have deep pride on their armed forces. They wish their defence forces to be stronger and sharper. They are happy with every achievement of our soldiers.
We only need to make sure that our armed forces do not use their training and weapon in brutalizing their own people.
July 16, 2008 at 6:49 pm
Dear Major Reza,
In addition to what Rumi bhai has said, I’d like to point out two more things.
1. If you look at the photos of the event carefully, you’ll see that at least some of the protesters were probably working youths who had been badly hurt by rising prices and the economic stagnation that followed 1/11. This doesn’t justify the violence against the individual in uniform. But this does put the whole event in context.
2. It is important to stress that our armed forces are raised from us. It is not a foreign army of occupation. It doesn’t have a recruitment policy based on some notion of ethnic or caste superiority. If we looked closely, we will see that the average 20 something DU student protesting last August has a cousin in the cantonment. We should never forget that those who put the army and students in a conflict situation are really pitting brothers against each other.