Biman Bangladesh: New Look

Biman Bangladesh is not only inducting a new aircraft type into its fleet (a Boeing 737-800), but a new color scheme as well. Check out the photo below:



Personally, I don't like it. Too much blue and not enough verdant green and red of the national flag.

1971 Pakistan's Surrender in Dhaka: TV Footage

Here are a couple of videos broadcasting Pakistan's surrender in Dhaka (then called Dacca):





Both of these videos are important historical artifacts reminding people why Bangladesh came about.

[h/t: acorn]

Elections In Bangladesh:

The Awami League has returned to power after two-years of military-backed rule, winning the election. The results were resounding for the Awami League-led alliance, which won over 260-seats, while the hapless BNP-led alliance won only 30 seats, with their chief ally, Jamaat-e-Islami, winning a paltry two seats.

I have two thoughts on this watershed election.

It is worth noting, however, how poorly Jaamat faired in the election. Many feared Jamaat’s growing political prowess as they won more seats with each subsequent election, a clear-cut sign of Islamization of Bangadesh society, but in reality Jamaat was nothing more than a house of cards. For all their public piety, for all their purported virtue, for all they do for the poor and the downtrodden, Jamaat have proven themselves to be sleazy and dishonest. For one thing, they supported terrorist outfits. They openly denied their involvement in suppressing the independence movement. When confronted with the facts, they changed their tune, suddenly claiming they were on the side of history-- on the wrong side. Such blatant dishonesty was paid back in spades at the polling station. Let us hope they are marginalized for some time to come.

Finally, are we witnessing a new era in Bangladeshi politics, or reverting to the same old, same old? One of the hallmarks of military rule is the perception that things were better: law-and order was better, less corruption, more stability, etc. Can the Awami League sustain what the military has started? It’s possible given the overwhelming majority they currently hold, but, often, such overwhelming majority can also lead to tyranny and autocracy and their evil step-child, corruption.

Let's hope that Bangladesh is on a positive track.

Doha Round Collapses: Everybody Loses

The Doha Round of trade talks have officially collapsed. These negotiations, which have been going on for what feels like forever, would have reduced or eliminated odious agriculture subsidies and tariffs and make trading of agricultural products simpler and cheaper. Who to blame for this failure? Depends on whom you ask. Here's an editorial from the The Daily Star, a Bangladeshi newspaper, who is blaming the developed world, specifically the United States and the European Union:

The final impasse was the demand from the G-33 which wanted special safeguard mechanisms to protect farmers in the developing world against temporary surges in cut-price imports of cotton and rice. When one considers that these safeguards would be the only thing standing between hundreds of millions of subsistence farmers and penury, to say nothing of the stability of billions throughout the developing world, it is hard to fathom the opposition.

What is really outrageous about opposition to this from the West is that it insist not only on its own tariffs but also on massive agricultural subsidies that protect its handful of farmers and massively distort the international price of goods, causing further hardship to farmers in the developing world.

But the developed world, in turn, and led by the West, is blaming the developing world for trying to have its cake and eat it too; all at the expense of their farmers. The Washington Post is leading the charge on this score:

Still, as last-ditch talks moved into last weekend, the United States and European Union had made some concessions on farm supports, and WTO Director-General Pascal Lamy had submitted a compromise plan that seemed to draw at least tentative approval from most participants. It was at that point that India and China essentially torpedoed the talks, asserting a broad right to raise tariffs to protect their poor farmers from "import surges," price drops and other vicissitudes of the world market. China, which had been relatively quiet throughout most of the talks, was particularly vituperative, blasting U.S. arguments as "absurd," even though Brazil and several other developing countries agreed with Washington.

China's role in the demise of the Doha Round is particularly dismaying, considering China has reaped huge benefits from global trade in the seven years since it joined the organization -- with strong U.S. support. Chinese exports have quadrupled from $300 billion in 2002 to $1.2 trillion in 2007, thanks in large part to free access to the U.S. market. U.S. supporters of Chinese inclusion in the WTO argued that drawing China into a system of multilateral give-and-take would mute its nationalistic tendencies. Evidently, the Chinese see the matter differently. They, and the world, will be poorer because of it.

It's safe to say that obstinacy on both sides led to the demise of the Doha Round. The developed world insists on paying subsidies to farmers, which in this era of high food prices is absurd. The developed world then demands open access to the developing world markets for their "cheap" food, giving local farmers an economic disadvantage. I believe the developing world has the right to protect its farmers as the developed world protect theirs.

At the same time, the developing world, led by China and India, insist on keeping mechanisms protecting its farmers against the onslaught on "cheap" food, even if the developed world ends its subsidies and tariffs. This will give developed world an advantage while penalizing western farmers for being more efficient and productive. This is a non-starter as well.

But ultimate loser in this fiasco are the consumers in both the developing and developed world, who will continue to pay high prices for agricultural products. It is also a defeat for free-trade, and a disturbing win for protectionism, which will only punish the entire world.

Sam Manekshaw: The Passing Of A Great Soldier

Field Marshal Sam Manekshaw is no more. He has died at the ripe old age of 94; at a military hospital in Tamil Nadu. It was he who led Indian forces into Bangladesh (then East Pakistan) in 1971: vanquishing the Pakistani army, resulting in the creation of independent Bangladesh. It's safe to say that many Bangladeshis from that era still hold him in high esteem. He retired soon after, capping a four-decade career. Manekshaw was a soldier to his last day, always donning the uniform when making public appearances.

NDTV has a nice news tribute:



He considered himself to be a soldier's soldier. Nevertheless, he was a rather charming and witty fellow, subduing superiors, colleagues and, on occasion, enemies alike with his trademark British mannerisms. India has lost a great soldier. He will be missed but not forgotten.

Bangladesh's Al Capone

When you want to take down a big-time criminal in a round about way, you convict him on a lesser charge. This is how Al Capone was taken down and this, hopefully, how Motiur Rahman Nizami, Ameer of Jamaat-e-Islami, Bangladesh's largest Islamic political party, will be taken down as well.

Nizami is a war criminal, pure and simple. During 1971, Nizami sided with Pakistan in suppressing forces dedicated to Bengali independence. He formed a shadowy para-military group called Al-Badr, which targeted minorities (mostly Hindus), intellectuals, professionals, secularists, almost anyone with a pro-independence bent. Al-Badr was not above committing rapes, torture, or outright murder in order to smother a popular independence movement.

Al Capone was arrested, indicted and convicted for tax evasion. Nizami has been indicted for corruption. Hopefully, he will be convicted and spend his twilight years in a jail. It's not the exactly the justice his victims deserve, but it will have to do.

Blaming RAW Yet Again

Yet another pointless article accusing RAW of being the boogeyman of South Asia, spearheading India's expansionist mindset (whatever the hell that means). A choice quote:

“RAW over the years has admirably fulfilled its tasks of destabilizing target states through unbridled export of terrorism.”

If you substitute ISI for RAW, the statement would be 100% correct.

The Bangladesh Observer

Does anyone know if The Bangladesh Observer is still being published? They don't seem to have a web site anymore.

Train Diplomacy

Starting April 14th there will be direct train service between Bangladesh and India for the first time since 1965. This editorial in The Daily Star gives a good summary of this momentous occasion:

THE train service between Dhaka and Kolkata, a link to be resumed after 43 years, will add a new dimension to traveling between the two most historic capitals of the region. If everything goes well, the much-awaited service in the shape of “Moitree Express” is to start on 14 April, Pahela Baishakh, which is an auspicious day for the Bengalis on the two sides of the border. According to the deal signed by the representatives of the two governments, passenger trains will run between Cantonment Station in Dhaka and Chitpur Station in Kolkata through the Darshana border for a period of three years. The treaty would be renewed if the two sides find it worthwhile after the period initially agreed upon.

I don't know the precise details, but I presume the train service will be direct with no intermediate stops between Kolkata and Dhaka aside from Darshana. This is good for people in Kolkata and Dhaka, but it shuts out anybody living and wanting to travel between these two cities. Nevertheless, it is a welcome step in Indo-Bangla relations, which have often been rocky.

Hasina Medical Visit Blocked

Sheikh Hasina needs to be sent abroad for medical treatment, a team of doctors attests:

Prof Mohammad Abu Tahir, Prof Tofail Ahmed, Prof Pran Gopal Dutta, Prof Modasser Ali, Prof MU Kabir Chowdhury, Dr ABM Abdullah and Dr MH Millat examined her for over an hour after her admission in the morning. They concluded there is no alternative to sending her abroad for treatment if she is to avoid permanently impaired hearing.

In another development, the US doctors, who had earlier treated Hasina for the ear injuries she sustained in the August 21 grenade blasts, have requested the jail authorities to send her to their hospital in Florida without delay.

It makes sense that doctors who have treated her before would be in the best position to treat her again. So why is the government so reluctant to release her? What's she going to do? Apply for political asylum in the United States? Her position is not that weak, especially that the Awami League is poised to win the next election. So I see no harm in temporarily releasing Hasina.

On the other hand, there's a raging debate why the rich, elites and politicians have to go abroad for treatment when there are facilities in Bangladesh, but that's a whole different can of worms.

Private Phone Companies Gaining Ground In Bangladesh

The Bangladesh government showed great nerve when it shutdown a money-losing entity like the Adamjee Jute Mill, after failing repeatedly to make it profitable. It should do something with the Bangladesh Telegraph and Telephone Board (BTTB), the state-owned telecommunication company, which is bleeding red ink as nimble competitors steal its customers. Some choice quotes from this Daily Star article:

The number of private land phone users more than doubled in 2007, while state owned BTTB saw its number of subscribers drop, being unable to compete with the better service and cheaper connection of its private rivals.

So far BTTB has been unable to capitalise on this market as it is burdened by a reputation for bureaucracy, delays and hidden charges.

Among the private PSTN operators RanksTel is the largest with 1.13 lakh customers by the end of 2007, up 148 percent in the year. RanksTel started commercial operation in April 2005 and invested around Tk 300 crore to expand its services.

“From the beginning, we have followed a strategy of bringing the telephony services to the customers' door,” said Masrur Nawaz Waiz, head of operation and coordination for Rankstel.

“It is very easy to have a telephone within an hour if anyone wants it now, this is a real contrast with the past when it was so tough to get phone. This change helps us to attract customers,” Waiz said.

“In the case of BTTB, its bad reputation for not providing services in time to the customers is the main reason for them loosing customers,” said a high official of Telecom Ministry, adding that BTTB will lose more customers in the coming years even after restructuring.

The accompanying graphic says it all, in my opinion. But unlike Adamjee and Biman, BTTB is a good candidate for privatization.

The days of government owning the lines of communications—telephone and telegraph, radio and television, and postal services—are long over. The telecommunication industry has become too fragmented (and less strategic) to be controlled by a monopoly, and the loss of revenue for BTTB is commensurate with this fragmentation.

The Atlantic: Free For Everybody!!!

TheAtlantic.com is now a free site. To celebrate, here’s a link to an article about Bangladesh by Robert Kaplan, one of my favorite writers, in the January/February issue of Atlantic. A primer:

With rising Islamic fundamentalism, weak government, and not enough dry land for its 150 million people, Bangladesh could use a break. Instead, it must face the catastrophic threat of climate change.

Enjoy!

Unfounded Fears Of An American Theocracy

M. Abdul Hafiz, columnist for The Daily Star, proffers his opinion on who will be the next President of the United States. Like most international commentators, he leans Democrat, of course; and naturally he’s weary of Republicans, especially of Huckabee. He writes:

The US constitution, in its first amendment, prohibited state support for the establishment of a religion -- a stipulation further articulated and reinforced by Thomas Jefferson, the third US president. However, much of the recent invocation of religion can be attributed to the increasing enthusiasm of the fundamentalist Evangelical Christians. Their activities were openly promoted by the Republicans during Bush's presidency, which, inspired by the neo-conservatives, produced a heady mix of religion and politics. The result is that an obscure Baptist Christian preacher Rev. Mike Huckabee surged forward in the polls in Iowa on the strength of his religious background. This trend has already distorted the secular character of American polity. Unless checkmated, the entire civilisational achievement of the great nation will be at stake.

Fundamentalist Christians have been involved in American politics off-and-on since the United States was founded, but they’ve never been successful in turning the United States into a theocracy that Mr. Hafiz fears. We can thank the Founding Fathers for their vision: first, for separating religion and government, which was a novel idea in the 18th century; and second, for constructing a constitutional mechanism— a system of check and balances—that makes a theocracy almost impossible. If somehow Huckabee became president, the prospect of American turning into a “Christian” nation would be next to nil.

Bangladesh Independence Day

December 16th is Victory Day in Bangladesh and I would be remiss if I didn’t talk about it, busy as I am. This day is celebrated with great fervor by almost everyone in Bangladesh. For them, the creation of Bangladesh is the fruit of a long struggle, whose seed was planted long ago by a bigoted West Pakistan government. But there’s one group that regrets the creation of Bangladesh, and they’re members of Jamaat-e-Islami.

Collectively, the independence of Bangladesh was a calamity for Jamaat and other Islamists. They tried to keep Pakistan whole, and even invoked Islam to do it—but to no avail. The thirst for independence could not be slaked by religion alone, so Jamaat and their minions resorted to violence instead. Thousands were killed, of course, and most of the killers got off scot-free.

Today, Jamaat has been rehabilitated into a major political force, courted by both major parties for their discipline and ability to bring out the vote. However, this does not mean the past has been forgotten, or forgiven. After all, Jamaat has history to answer to. This is why several Jamaat members and it supporters made some well-publicized gaffes about the independence movement and Jamaat’s role in it. They called it a civil war when it was no such thing. They said Jamaat had a positive role to play when, in reality, it tried to suffocate the movement, including murdering intellectuals, raping of women, and supporting marauding Pakistani troops.

In essence, it was an exercise to whitewash history. Fortunately, reaction from many quarters came swiftly and strongly. I was glad to read editorials, articles, and listen to public utterances denouncing Jamaat for the liars they are.

And what does Pakistan have to say about this day? They played the biggest role in Bangladesh’s independence. Very little from what I’ve been reading. This day is like a bad memory, better to be forgotten then remembered. But I believe this Pakistan Observer editorial says it best, as it’s the voice of the establishment:

WE are glad that barring the crisis generated by the infighting of two Begums that brought political and economic instability in Bangladesh, the brotherly country was otherwise doing well in all spheres of life. BD is progressing well and is considered a respectable member of the comity of nations. This is a source of satisfaction and encouragement for people of Pakistan, who have best of relations with Bangladesh.

However, as far as people of Pakistan are concerned December 16 is day of recollection as the then united Pakistan met with a great tragedy on this day in 1971. Regrettably, barring a few statements and insignificant events taking places here and there was no worthwhile function to remember the day when the country was dismembered due to internal and external factors. No one – neither political leaders nor governmental personalities or media took any significant notice of the most tragic and shameful incident of surrender at the Paltan Maidan in Dhaka where commander of the Pakistani forces was insulted publicly. We have also forgotten contemptuous remarks of the then Indian Prime Minister that her country has taken revenge of 1,000 years of Muslim rule in the Sub-Continent. It is very important for the Government and the political parties to realize that what led to the addition of one of the blackest chapters in the Muslim history. Of course, India too played a crucial and decisive role in the fall of Dhaka by abetting feelings of people of the then East Pakistan and by imparting training and providing funds for destabilization in that part of Pakistan. However, it is also important to remember that the perception of injustices and trampling of the mandate of the people were the other major factors that culminated into dismemberment of Pakistan. We must not forget this lesson.

It sounds like it was written by some Foreign Office PR flack. Nevertheless, it has been the official view of every government since 1971, following the same script. First, it plays up the supposed “brotherly” relations between Bangladesh and Pakistan when no such relation exists. Relations are cordial, but hardly brotherly. In fact, it can be argued, that Bangladesh has more “brotherly” relations with India.

Second, that the independence movement was a vast conspiracy, engineered by India, instead of an indigenous movement. This is a total fabrication. The Pakistan Movement began in what was then East Pakistan and ended there, as well.

If Pakistan wants to have better relations with Bangladesh, it must do two things: first, take full responsibility for its actions that let to Bangladesh’s bloody independence; and second, take back the thousands of Bihari refugees who are currently stranded in Bangladesh, which has created a humanitarian crisis that is Pakistan’s making.

Jamaat Tries To Rewrite History

Jamaat-e-Islami is at it again, trying to rewrite history, denying its insidious role in Bangladesh’s independence. From The Daily Star:

People from all walks of life yesterday blasted Jamaat-e-Islami Secretary General Ali Ahsan Mohammad Mojaheed for his Thursday's comments, which they said went against the Liberation War.

Mojaheed on Thursday told the media that Jamaat did not work against the Liberation War in 1971 and there are no war criminals in the country.

This editorial adds a few more salient details:

...He said this before media displaying veritable arrogance and ire when asked about the role of Jamaat-e-Islami during the nine-month Bangladesh Liberation War of 1971. To our utter shock and indignation, Mujahid not only denied any wrong-doing by his party but was defiant enough to throw a challenge to the newsmen to dig into the history and find for themselves the role of Jamaat.

What level of ignorance does this man operate from? Did he say this with a straight face? Sadly, denying their grateful and gleeful collaboration with Pakistan to brutalize their fellow Bengalees—all in the name of Islam—is standard operating procedure for Jamaat. Have been doing it for years, in fact.

Fortunately, there is a trove of evidence to counter the blatantly false lies of Jamaat and their supporters. In fact, The Daily Star has published, also in the same issue, an interesting research article clearly documenting Jamaat’s involvement, some even published in their own newspaper! This is what Nizami, a senior Jamaat leader, wrote:

“Hindu forces are far stronger and capable than us. Unfortunately, a number of infidels have taken their side and are trying to weaken us from within. We have to foil their conspiracy and protect the existence and ideal of Pakistan. This is not possible only by defensive action...It is our luck that the Islam-loving youths of this country have been able to form the Al-Badr unit with the help of the Pakistani military...The youths of Al-Badr have renewed their pledge on this occasion...to stand next to the army to defeat the Hindu forces and annihilate Hindustan and hoist the flag of Islam all over the world."

History condemns Jamaat, and they should accept its verdict. They are lucky none of them have been jailed for their grisly crimes. In fact, various governments since 1971, in acts of cynicism, have not only given Jamaat leaders amnesty, but have rehabilitated them, courted their votes and even made them partners in coalition governments.

This explains why Jamaat says what it says and does what it does: they have not been held to account for their crimes. They got away with it. And this a great shame in Bangladesh today. We can take solace in the fact that history is on the side of the victims—for now.

Malaysia: No More Bangladeshis

Malaysia has decided that 300,000 Bangladeshis are more than enough and will not take in any more. Of course, Malaysia doesn’t explain why it's doing this.

Home Minister Datuk Seri Mohd Radzi Sheikh Ahmad said there were now too many workers and agents from Bangladesh in Malaysia.He said the presence of such agents who used Malaysians as sub-agents and the huge amount of money involved "are not a healthy sign, it is not good for the country".

I know manpower export is a sleazy business, and the Home Minister’s reticence explain loads; yet Malaysia still needs workers, it’s just looking elsewhere to get them.

Mohd Radzi told reporters in Putrajaya that Malaysia could obtain workers from 10 other countries such as Indonesia, Thailand, Cambodia, Myanmar, Sri Lanka, Vietnam, Nepal and Laos.

He said the government felt that it would do to rely on these countries for workers.

Why is Bangladesh being discriminated against? Is it their work ethic, are they dishonest, cheats, liars, etc? Considering how many Bangladeshis work overseas, this is an odd stance for Malaysia to take, not to mention an unfair one.

Bangladesh Army: Don't Overstay Your Welcome

In Bangladesh, the question on everybody’s mind is: when will the army return to the barracks, where they belong?

Army Chief General Moeen U Ahmed yesterday said the troops are working to help the government and will go back to their barracks the moment the government asks them to do so.

Translation: we’ll return to the barracks when we damn well please. It’s obvious who wears the pants in this relationship, and it’s not the caretaker government.

Let’s hope the military doesn't overstay its welcome. Sure, Bangladesh is less corrupt and electricity is more abundant, and things are good in general, but the army should remember that times of instability often follow times of prosperity. The Bangladesh Army should avoid Pakistan’s mistake and leave the running of government to civilians.

Bangladesh: I Can Call From Anywhere!

Bangladesh has undoubtedly many shortcomings—politically, economically, socially—but to its credit it can boast about one thing at least: possessing one of the best cellular phone networks in the world; better than India, Canada, and even the United States.

Rezwan, in this great post, recounts the experiences of an expatriate Canadian: who was able to access the internet through his cell phone from a remote village. I have no doubt. Even when I was in Bangladesh a few years ago, I was surprised that people were able to talk on cellular phones in the middle of nowhere, while I can barely get a signal outside my house.

Another thing that amazes me about Bangladesh’s cellular phone market is the level of penetration it has achieved, not only among the rich and middle-class, but the lower classes and the poor too.

1971: Who Ordered The Capture Of Dhaka?

Praveen Swami writes a terrific article that illuminates one of the rather more interesting controversies surrounding the 1971 war that led to Bangladesh's independence: was there a standing order to capture the capital city of Dhaka (then called Dacca), and if so, who ordered it? The story pits two key players against each other.

The debate has polarised supporters of India's then Army Chief Sam `Bahadur' Manekshaw, who went on to become its first Field Marshal, and the then Chief of Staff of the Eastern Command, Major-General J.F.R. Jacob.

Soon after deciding to enter the fray, the Indian Army’s initial goal was to capture and secure the western half of Bangladesh (then East Pakistan). Any further advancement could have led to a Pakistani counterattack towards India's borders.

Although Pakistani forces were positioned for the defence of the country's eastern wing, Indian planners anticipated the possibility of a two-division thrust towards Silchar or Agartala, as well as a counter-offensive against Kolkata, along the Jessore-Bangaon and Satkhira-Bashirhat axes. In addition, Pakistan expected both China and the United States to intervene on its side. Plans had to be drawn up not just to secure offensive victory, but guard against defeat in these worst-case scenarios. Indian strategists hoped to take as much territory as possible in a short-duration war, and use it to facilitate a subsequent political settlement.

It didn't matter in the end. Both the United States and China, after some sabre-rattling, did not interfere as first feared; and the Indian Army made better then expected progress on the ground, so the decision to capture Dhaka was almost an afterthought. The psychological victory of capturing Dhaka—where the whole mess began and Pakistani forces were based—would be worth the effort. The question still remains, though: who ordered it? Manekshaw or Jacob?

This question, and all facts relating to India’s involvement in Bangladesh’s independence, can be found in the official History of the Bangladesh War, 1971. The problem is that it is still classified by the Indian government. The odd thing, however, is that it’s been available to scholars and students for over ten years. I think it’s high time to release it to the public.

Biman's Problems Are Much Deeper...

Like this editorial in The Daily Star, I, too, question the caretaker government’s wisdom in turning Biman Bangladesh, the nation’s moribund flag carrier, into a public limited company (PLC). It’s not an elixir or a magic pill; it won’t make Biman any more viable: in fact it will still be the same debt-ridden, over-extended, over-staffed, and poorly-serviced airline everyone is use to seeing.

The crux of Biman’s problems is a bad business model and poor management. Much of Biman’s problem can be placed at the feet of every government that used it like a political fiefdom, doling out positions to party loyalists. The challenge to right-size Biman is immense: first, staff must be trimmed; second, all outstanding debts must be paid off, or renegotiated at more generous terms; third, new aircraft needs to be ordered; and fourth, a new business plan needs to be formulated and a dynamic management team to implement it. It’s a tall order that requires millions of dollars in additional capital and a lot of patience.

Unless these structural problems are addressed first, with the additional promise of no political interference from this and future governments, turning Biman into a PLC is a pointless exercise.