A debate is raging around Bangladesh – between real people and on the internet. Opinions are firmly-held, tempers get frayed quickly, and name-calling is always a possibility. And a lot depends on its outcome.
It’s not the debate that was started by Tarique Rahman about a week or so ago, about who is the first president of Bangladesh.
I firmly believe that history usually proves to be a fair judge. So, in about forty or so years, when all the people whose reputation hinged on painting Sheikh Mujibur Rahman as either an angel or a devil are gone from this earth, our nation and its history will arrive at its own judgment of that man. And that is how it should be.
But much more important than what Sheikh Mujib was in 1972 is what he beam in January 1975. We got out of BKSAL in the worst way imaginable – through a bloody and murderous military coup that only underlines how helpless and fragile the other institutions of the newly-formed state still were. Almost forty years later, we’ll escape Hasina’s proto-BKSAL because while the Gandhi family is quite comfortable disrupting electoral democracy in Bangladesh, it still hasn’t figured out how to do so as successfully in its own country. But we may not be so lucky the next time around.
Thus, the debate, in email inboxes and informal meetings rages on, how to modify Bangladesh’s frame of government that the next wanna-be Hasina is not able to succeed. “In question of power,” Thomas Jefferson thundered, “let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution.” Our constitutional chains have proven flimsy and brittle so far. How to strengthen them so as to prevent the next dictator from fostering herself upon is as long she likes is the great question of the current time.
April 13, 2014 at 2:20 am
Well said ….
April 18, 2014 at 9:04 pm
How are we to bind men down to the constitution if people like Zia changed it willy nilly setting evil precident?
If BKSAL was so bad, did it really take 21 years to move on from the 4 months experimentation with that?
Please explain, when Mujib said things had gotten out of control so he needed to have a temporary centralization of power, how is it different from what we are supposedly told that Zia had no choice but to do in his murderous reign of 4 years during which he killed freedom fighters, civilians, started ethnic cleansing in CHT, had no option but to bolster his position by bringing back Pakistani war criminals including as PM etc etc etc? If wrong for Mujib, why right for Zia in your eyes? These are the questions that , yes, when people whose livelihood not dependent on Hasina or Khaleda (or Tareq) 40 years from now, may honestly discuss.
Please, also plan what else revelation – Zia was actually god almighty – isn’t it obvious even if not said for last 40 years – will come to be revealed tomorrow, so you can retroactively plan to justify and defend.
April 22, 2014 at 9:15 pm
Group 1:
A set of impartial bodies, can come from all religious belief based on proportional population. They are honest, impartial, pious, educated and have history within their community and nation. They are rational, impartial, balanced and fair. ANY society DEFINITELY has people like that. These groups agree on the basic humanity, equal justices for all, and devoid of ANY SORT VULGARITY and OBSCENE liberty in man women relation, and corrupt freedom. Whole nation can join in these debates and an outcome will be there through referendum weather nation want a group like that, or not. They will have no power in government positions, or running a government, or influencing a government in any shape. However; they may have a common say on national defense interest regarding foreign influence. There will be no time limit for them. They will have NO say whether any party or running government is doing bad, or good, and if they do, they break the oath, and will not be part of the group. Any who asks them about opinion on parties, equally violates his/her job. They will have ONE crucial job: MANAGE the national electoral process periodically.
Group 2:
Electoral Team: Only responsible to group 1 in running NATIONAL election and referendum. Defense force must join during those few days to keep security to voters. NO electronic, or mechanical voting, and it must be paper ballots. Counting must be done in presence of political representative as witness only.
Election can take place during last 3 months of running government. Transition must take place cordially by the law of land. Government runs the nation through mandate of people. Time limit to head of state. But in any case, and be it whoever; ANY SORT VULGARITY and OBSCENE liberty in man women relation cannot be promoted. Enemies of humanity use alcoholism, gambling, sex as tools to corrupt people and then used them as an electoral representative to run their agenda in the name of equality, liberty and freedom. You can NEVER deal with these set of people who are ABSOLUTELY inferior quality humanity can offer.
June 11, 2014 at 4:05 am
Maximum bangladeshi peoples are now confused about real history of war.
January 5, 2015 at 9:58 pm
Needless to say, what is going now in the name of democracy in Bangladesh does not augur well for the future. AL can keep going like this for perhaps a few years, and celebrate the destruction of BNP, but at the end of the day, not leaving any room for opposition can only result in more extreme forces coming to the fore. Secular friends appear to embrace AL as the lesser evil; what they fail to understand is that whatever causes they hold near and dear will be swept aside by the downfall of AL if they keep associating with the ruling repressive regime.