ShahidulNews

`Yes,’ `Wow,’ youth adda with Hillary Clinton…

Shahidul Alam — Mon, 14 May 2012 17:51:37 +0000

by rahnuma ahmed

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton participates in an adda/townterview with Bangladeshi youth moderated by Ejaj Ahmad, Founder and President of Bangladesh Youth Leadership Center, and Munni Saha, Head of News at ATN News, in Dhaka, Bangladesh, on May 6, 2012.

Wouldn’t she have been able to handle halfway decent questions?

I can’t help but wonder and you can’t blame me, for I’ve viewed the so-called adda, I’ve pored over the transcript — available on the Facebook page of the US embassy and American Centre in Dhaka, and the US department of state’s website respectively — I’ve considered it from this angle and that, all in all, I’ve devoted loads of time.

Except for having misspelt Munni Saha’s name, “Mooni Saha”, and an inordinate number of “inaudible”s, the transcript seems okay.

The American side insists on terming the programme a “townterview”, a word I hadn’t come across earlier, and the Bangladeshis, adda — but that was about all they seemed to disagree upon.

If they’d called the programme “Yes, Minister” instead — a la the British comedy series of the 1980s — it’d have made things simpler. It’d have gotten rid of the silly disagreement over terminology, made it 101% accurate.

Interestingly enough, even though the State Department website calls it a “townterview” — a town hall meeting where the town interviews her(?) — in the so-called adda itself, while Hillary insists early on that she wants it to be “a real conversation,” she ends up hogging nearly 80 percent of talk time. A pointer to the gap between what political elites say, and do. A crucial one which the captive/captivated audience, unsurprisingly so, failed to notice.

“Celebrity culture” and “junk politics,” writes Chris Hedges, creates a world of illusion which invisibilises the signs of impending disasters: the physical degradation of the planet, the cruelty of global capitalism, the looming oil crisis, the collapse of financial markets, misguided imperial wars etc., etc. (Empire of Illusion, 2009).

Television creates in us a false sense of intimacy with our elite. It enables the skilful and ruthless control and manipulation of the content of information. Propaganda becomes a substitute for ideas and ideology. The culture of illusion, he says, thrives by robbing us of the intellectual and linguistic tools to separate illusion from truth. It reduces us to the level and dependency of children. It impoverishes language. We become captivated by slogans, a smile, perceived sincerity and attractiveness, alongwith personal narratives — all carefully crafted by the puppet masters. By the agents, publicists, marketing departments, promoters, script writers, television and movie producers, advertisers, video technicians, photographers, bodyguards, wardrobe consultants, fitness trainers, pollsters, public announcers and television news personalities.

Having viewed Hillary’s so-called adda, I’d add youth leaders to the list.

It is style and story, not content and fact, that inform mass politics, says Hedges. All created through artful theatrical staging and scripting by political spin machines.

Borrowing Benjamin DeMott’s coinage, he writes, celebrity culture bequeaths “junk politics.” Junk politics does not demand justice or the reparation of rights. It personalizes and moralizes issues rather than clarifying them. The result? Nothing changes, “meaning zero interruption in the processes and practices that strengthen existing, interlocking systems of socioeconomic advantage. “It seeks at every turn to obliterate voters’ consciousness of socioeconomic and other differences in their midst” (DeMott). Those captivated by the cult of celebrity do not examine voting records or compare verbal claims with written and published facts and reports. The reality of the world is whatever political leaders say is reality.

Studio participants of staged American wrestling matches which we have the fortune to watch on cable television, chant, yell, intone, boo, scream.

The responses here, as was only to be expected, were civil. They applauded, while the local onstage puppet masters (puppets themselves?) bowed and scraped, Yes. Sure. Wow. Right. Okay. Absolutely. Yeah. Thank you.

Cue-ing home viewers to applaud as well. To be taken in equally by the smile. The perceived sincerity. The attractiveness.

Cue-ing us to ignore the staging. The spinning. The propaganda.

The questions? How does it feel to be in Bangladesh after your first visit 17 years ago as First Lady of the United States? How did your meeting with Sir Abed and Dr Yunus go? (these were asked beseechingly by “Mooni” with clasped hands). What is the US administration’s stand on the Grameen Bank? Do you consider Bangladesh an emerging soft power? What are the main obstacles to peace in this region? Why do we seek US advice when we talk of internal politics? (followed by leading words sugarred in by Munni), so it’s totally a friendly advice, there is no pressure…

What intitiatives will the US administration take at the upcoming Rio+20 conference to help Bangladesh, one of the lowest contributors to carbon emissions but worst-affected by climate change? You champion the use of social media, but how do you manage? What is your response to the common perception among many young people that the US is anti-Muslim? Do you have any plans to resume the DV programme so that common people can go to the US and contribute there?

You’ve got a very beautiful smile, followed by the question, Being a woman, what advantages or disadvantages did you face in getting to where you are now? You are an inspiration, a leader for us, a loving mother, a great soul — where lies the magic? You are pressing the issue of young leaders, but what about senior, more experienced ones?

Can we now be hopeful of seeing long-term strategic and stable US-Bangla relations since a partnership agreement was signed between the two countries last night? What role do you expect us to play in this region? Can we expect duty free access to the US market?

A labour leader was recently murdered very brutally, in such a situation how can we work to advance workers rights when police, goons, thugs and false allegations in court obstruct us? How can US and Bangladesh cooperate on the energy and power sector, what about US investments…? What are you taking back from Bangladesh on this trip?

Each question tailor-made to evoke lectures, homilies and outright denials. Even lies, since Hillary’s claims were not compared with contrary evidence available in solidly-researched reports.

For after all, the aim of townterview/adda was to provide Ms Clinton with a platform to tell Bangladeshis that reality is what she says it is.

No fact-checking. No counter-questions. No disagreement. No other perspective. In effect, there was no real conversation, no adda (culturally, a practice in sociability). A monologue, instead. A skilful and ruthless control and manipulation of information. Political spinning. In short, junk politics.

Would she have been able to handle halfway decent questions? For instance, like the questions posed by Pakistani women journalists and participants in October 30, 2009 in a townterview held in the National Art Gallery, Islamabad:

– We are fighting a war that is imposed on us, it is not our war, are you satisfied with what is going on? You had one 9/11, we are having 9/11s daily in Pakistan.

– You spoke of diplomatic immunity, two American private security companies have diplomatic immunity, including Blackwater. What’s your response to that?

– You speak of investing in the people of Pakistan, but the perception is that you are micro-managing everything, Pakistani politics, the energy sector, you are doing everything. Is there any truth to the perception?

– A lot of US aid money is coming into Pakistan but most of the money, taxpayer money, goes back to America. Quite a lot of the money goes to foreign contractors, why is that?

– According to a United Nations committee report, drone attacks may constitute a violation of international law, it constitutes the execution of people without a trial, Pakistani people associate it with US policy towards Pakistan as a whole.

– Drone attacks have been relentless under the Obama administration, does the Obama administration feel that the loss of life and how people feel about them in Pakistan is worth it, given the minimal successes you get?

And, lastly, this one from a law student,

– What is actually terrorism in U.S. eyes? Is the killing of innocent victims in drone attacks terrorism or is the killing of people in a marketplace in Peshawar, is that terrorism? In the United States – do you perceive both victims as victims of terrorism?

To which, Madam Secretary — a graduate from Yale Law School, with nearly four decades in public service as a lawyer — had replied, “No, I do not. I do not.” In other words, the US has exclusive rights to defining terrorism. What the US does, is not terrorism, it can never be terrorism. (The Islamabad townterview had been moderated by five female news anchors, some of them, including the host Saima Mohsin had later been subjected to public criticism when photographs of them at a US Embassy party, had been posted on Facebook by an American diplomat, probably not realising that it would go viral. The state-run PTV had suspended two journalists since government employees can attend private gatherings at foreign diplomatic missions only if they have prior permission, and only if their job description permits them to do so).

To return to the question of Hillary Clinton’s ability to handle half-decent questions, I advise readers to watch the townterview on YouTube (in five-parts), to see her wriggle, a very different body language and demeanour as compared to her so-called adda in Dhaka. You’ll understand why I think, no.

Many of the female activists, academics, lawyers, journalists, parliamentarians and businesswomen who’d attended the Islamabad townterview — described in the Pakistan media as Hillary’s “charm offensive” — had been unimpressed. It was “a waste of my time,” said a university teacher. Hillary wasn’t interested in hearing about the “reality of our daily lives” (The Christian Science Monitor, October 30, 2009).

As a matter of fact, denying their reality and creating the illusion that her administration’s was real, was the objective.

Women who attended the Islamabad townterview had not been interested in Hillary’s “personal-level diplomacy,” in talk of families and schools inculcating “habits of the heart” — tolerance, compromise etc., — in young children. Nor in her reminiscences, or jokes either. They’d wanted to talk about security matters instead. Questions on drones, on India-Pakistan relations, Kashmir etc., had won the biggest round of applause.

“[Hillary's] responses were as expected,” said Ameena Saiyid, the managing director of Oxford University Press. Her answers were too “reserved,” complained another participant. While another, a resident of the South Waziristan Tribal Agency, had asked “Why were we here? What did they want us to ask? What did they want to convey to us?”

“This meeting was as micromanaged as our country’s internal affairs,” quipped a university teacher. “[The Americans] were trying to retain the upper-hand in the conversation.”

If the Islamabad townterview was micro-managed, how does Dhaka’s International School one fare? Micro-micro-managed?

No questions raised about the presence of US Special Forces in Bangladesh as revealed recently at a Congressional hearing (March 1, 2012), watery ones instead about soft power, vague ones about obstacles to peace in the region. No questions about WikiLeaks revelations either: about former US ambassador James F Moriarty urging Tawfiq-e-Elahi Chowdhury, the prime minister’s energy advisor, to authorise coal mining in Phulbari. “Open-pit mining seem[s] the best way forward.” Seeking assurances that US-based Conoco Phillips be awarded two of the uncontested blocks in the Bay of Bengal. That Chevron be permitted to improve the flow in Bangladesh’s main gas pipeline. The present government, as we know, had complied. Not only were no questions raised, Munni Saha’s ‘why do we seek US advice when we talk of internal politics?’ followed by ‘so it’s totally a friendly advice, there is no pressure…’ had forestalled such questions.

While it is true, as Hillary had pointed out in answer to labour activist Aminul Islam’s brutal killing, that Colombia had killed thousands of labor organisers (according to HRW, since 1986, 2,880 labour leaders have been murdered), she eclipsed the fact that it is one of the leading recipients of US military aid and training. That Congress has ratified a trade pact with Colombia despite American labor unions who argued that the murders provided grounds for blocking trade deals. That, despite the Colombian military’s atrocious human rights record, Pentagon is planning to establish a new military facility in Colombia, to give the U.S. increased capacity for military intervention throughout most of Latin America.

Addressing the so-called adda audience, Hillary had said, “And each of you who is a young leader has so much at stake in making your country what it can be in your lifetime.”

Munni had described her co-moderator Ejaj Ahmad, founder and president of Bangladesh Youth Leadership Center (BYLC), a graduate of Harvard University, as a “leader of leaders.” As I watched all the bowing and scraping, I couldn’t help but think, if this is what a Harvard education inculcates in its students, if it only serves to colonise/re-colonise the mind, well, then….maybe, Jahangirnagar is better?

Admittedly, there are interruptions to the academic calendar, but even most first year undergrads have a far more grounded grasp of reality!

Published in New Age, Monday, May 14, 2012

UPDATE: MAY 07, 2012 Reclaiming Jahangirnagar from a ‘godfather’ VC

Shahidul Alam — Mon, 07 May 2012 08:36:02 +0000

by rahnuma ahmed

Two faculty members, one speaking in support of the JU vice-chancellor, while the other's placard demands exemplary punishment of "terrorist" teachers, alluding to botany faculty members who had allegedly assaulted the departmental chairperson, an allegation which led to the prompt arrest and overnight detention of two teachers of the department, they were released on April 26 morning. Outside the VC's residence, May 1, 2012. ©Saydia Gulrukh

Jahangirnagar University Sangskritik Jote president Koli Mahmud, who was attacked by 'VC League' activists on April 28; besides a broken leg, Koli has deep gashes on his shoulders and back, doctors there say, the injuries speak of 'attempted murder.' He and other Jote activists had been rescued by Shikkhok Shomaj teachers who had rushed to the spot. Enam Medical College Hospital, Savar, May 1, 2012. © Saydia Gulrukh

Four fast-unto-death students listen as striking compatriots sing protest songs in teacher-student seige outside main entrance to VC's residence. The Jahangirnagar Shangskritik Jote and Shontrasher Biruddhe Jahangirnagar's banner behind demands the resignation of the VC, for being authoritarian and providing protection to attackers of teachers and students. May 1, 2012. © Saydia Gulrukh

The strike has been called off.

At first, the large body of teachers of different political persuasions — left-inclined, Awami League, Bangladesh Nationalist Party, and also, ones with no political allegiances whatsoever — who had united as Shikkhok Shomaj (Teachers Society) at Jahangirnagar, called off their four-month long strike.

Naseem Akhter Hussain, its convenor and leader of the 12 member strong delegation which met the prime minister at the latter’s invitation on May 3 morning, informed the press in the evening, at the end of a 5-hour long Shikkhok Shomaj meeting, “The prime minister has assured us and we have full confidence in her. So we are calling off our programme. We are hoping she will resolve it soon.”

Immediately after the announcement, Shikkhok Shomaj (SS), as a collectivity disbanded the 8-day long seige of the vice-chancellor professor Sharif Enamul Kabir’s residence, which had begun after two members of the SS had been picked up by the police and detained overnight, which, agitating teachers insist, was based on spurious allegations (see photo 1).

However, individual teachers, grouped in cells on a roster basis, remained outside the vice-chancellor’s residence, to oversee the medical needs of fast-unto-death students, to provide protection in case if ‘VC League’ goons attacked again. The two teachers, Shoma Momtaz and Dr Shamima Sultana, who had joined the students, discontinued their fast-unto-death hunger strike the next morning.

The students — who had joined in the seige after the VC League’s thugs had attacked and beaten up Jahangirnagar Shangskritik Jote’s (JSJ) members on April 28 (see pic 2) –however, refused. Immediately after the SS called off its movement, Shakila Sharmin, general secretary of the JSJ told waiting members of the press, “We welcome the prime minister’s assurance. But we will continue with our hunger strike as long as the vice-chancellor does not step down.”

They did, two days later. On May 5 afternoon, eight students were persuaded by Awami League lawmaker and former cinema actress, Sarah Begum Kobori to end their hunger strike. Kobori assured the students in the presence of Naseem Akhter Hussain, that the prime minister would discuss the matter with the chancellor, that she would not “disappoint” them. However, Shakila Sharmin was quick to assert, while we have confidence in the prime minister, if our demand is not met shortly, we will resume our agitation against the vice-chancellor. Television news reports showed shots of students marching in an interim victory procession.

Was the Shikkhok Shomaj’s decision to call off the agitation hasty? Abrupt? Insensitive toward the striking students, for, after all, a joint platform had been formed, Shikkhok-Shikkharthi Shonghoti Moncho, after Jote’s student-activists had been attacked by the ‘VC League.’ Would it have been better if the SS had withdrawn some of its programmes as a gesture of respect and goodwill towards the prime minister’s overture, but had not called off the entire movement until her assurances had yielded concrete results? Controversy rages, as information and speculation filters through. The prime minister had insisted, it had to be all or nothing. Further, she had implied, if the teachers didn’t agree, it would be their fault.

The exercise of concentrated and unbridled power, I’m inclined to think, had possibly manoeuvred the teachers into a tight corner, particularly those, who, although firm in their convictions, have previously not experienced ruling power at close quarters. At how swirling waves of stately pomp and privilege can sweep to the margins the monstrous stories of corruption and terror that the teachers had unburdened to the prime minister.

Government spokespersons had at first constructed the agitation as “a BNP-Jamaat affair,” out to destabilise the campus, to embarass the government. But that increasingly became difficult to sustain, and was finally exposed as sheer Awami League propaganda when a staggering number of widely known and respected persons, both secular and non-partisan, not only lent their support to the protest movement but took the trouble to go to the campus. To join the sit-in.

Desperate attempts had been launched by members of the ruling circle, but these failed. Such as the one by Tarana Halim, actress, AL lawmaker and JU senate member who went to campus on May 1; she insisted, at her “own” initiative. She spoke to “both” sides for hours at length and told the press, arguments made by neither could be dismissed. To top it all, Tarana wrote about it in bdnews24.com’s Bangla Blog. The title itself — “Bisshobiddaloye eto ronger ki dorkar?” — drew heavy criticism, one commentator reminded her that not only was the color grouping of politically partisan teachers needed (white, blue, pink), Bongobondhu Porishod was needed, Bongomata Porishod was needed, Zia Porishod was needed, or else, he said, “how will you/your ruling party decide who to appoint as the vice-chancellor?”

In contrast, Kobori’s intervention appeared genuine and sincere. She spoke of Zubair’s mother’s grief, of her own fight against terror in her constituency, of how, if the vice-chancellor had “truly” been a teacher, he would have resigned long ago to help resolve the crisis.

Over the last few days, events at Jahangirnagar have moved so fast that the government’s manufacturing of teacher-student protests as being “a BNP-Jamaat affair,” have had few takers-on, despite being revised and re-created by groups and forces closely aligned with the Awami League. For instance, the Sammilita Sangskritik Jote, the largest alliance of cultural organisations, in a press conference in Dhaka on May 3, while protesting against the attack on JU’s cultural activists, expressed fears about whether Shibir had secretly infiltrated JSJ. They would conduct an enquiry, they said, since conspiracies to foil the 1971 war crimes trials were afoot. Their stand spoke of a dead refusal to address the issue of violence on campus. To address the issue of the source of that violence.

Jahangirnagar’s red earth seemed redder to me when I joined the Unmukto Shonghoti Moncho (Open Solidarity Platform), alongwith many, many others from Dhaka — public intellectuals, academics, human rights and development activists, cultural activists, journalists, former students — to express my solidarity with the movement for a terror-and-corruption-free campus on May 1, 2, and 4.

Had final year Honor’s student Zubair Ahmed’s blood, killed allegedly by members of the ‘VC League’, made it redder?

As storm winds lashed out, as sheets of rain poured down, I wondered if it was a message from Zubair up there somewhere. I wondered whether he was testing our collective resolve to seek punishment for his killers — those who had pushed the metal rods into his body, those who had provided protection to his killers from near and afar, as well as those JU academics who had feigned ignorance.

Bengali “Crossfire” reaches U.S.

Shahidul Alam — Sun, 06 May 2012 05:24:11 +0000

by BEENA SARWAR on MAY 4, 2012 Latitude News

In “Crossfire,” an exhibition of photographs at the Queens Museum of Art in New York that closes on Sunday the 6th, acclaimed Bangladeshi photographer and activist Shahidul Alam chronicles the extra-judicial killings allegedly committed by Bangladesh’s Rapid Action Battalion, or RAB.Over a thousand victims have been ‘cross-fired,’ or executed by police without trial, in the last four years in the South Asian country, human rights activists claim. Many more people, perhaps thousands in total, have suffered similar fates, they say.

Shahidul Alam in New York’s Central Park (Beena Sarwar)

The founder of the multimedia Drik Picture Libraryand the nonprofit photo agency Majority World, Alam combines art, advocacy and teaching to draw attention to human rights abuses.

In the Queens Museum exhibition, which the Bangladeshi government shut down in Dhaka in 2010, Alam said he hopes to draw attention to a problem not just in Bangladesh but anywhere authorities ignore the rule of law with impunity.

The director of public events at the Queens Museum, Prerana Reddy, said the show dovetailed with the museum’s mission of reaching out to the local community. The Borough of Queens in New York City is home to the largest Bengali population in the United States.

“We want to create a space outside of our regular curatorial space, highlight campaigns and activities that are relevant to the community in this area,” said Reddy. “This is not just a space where we hang photos.”

Beena Sarwar spoke with Alam for Latitude News when he visited New York for the exhibition’s launch.

Alam chose to photograph in the very locations where so-called ‘crossfire’ killings took place. The absence of the people in the photos denotes the presence of a tragedy, he said. (Shahidul Alam)

Latitude News: These photographs are like beautiful, sinister paintings, still life studies absent people. Why this crafted approach, so different from your usual work?

A ‘gamcha,’ or sarong, Bangladeshi police might have used in alleged strangling of victims. (Shahidul Alam)

Alam: As a journalist, the best you can do is to unearth information and bring it to the public. If that still doesn’t do what you hoped, you need to re-think the strategy. In the case of crossfire killings, simply providing information is clearly not enough. A research team looked at every known case of crossfire death. The photographs are visual metaphors without necessarily being physical representations. Every picture is banal by itself, but based on a case study. Every one is taken in the middle of the night and all the pictures are lit by torchlight, because that’s how survivors and victims’ families recall the incidents. Captions are usually very important to my work, but I deliberately left them out, so viewers have to work out the references for themselves [Editor's note: Except for the first photo, we have included captions because readers of this story will not have the context provided at the exhibition]. After the government sent riot police to shut the show down, I asked the policemen what they thought. They provided an entire contextualization. They knew exactly what each picture symbolized — like the gamcha [sarong] in one of the photos. “This can be used to strangle or suffocate a man,” they said.

LN: What impact did the show have?

Alam: Well, right afterwards there was a very rapid decline in crossfire killings. Then the government changed strategy. They started disappearing people. Now both disappearances and killings have gone up. But the show did have an impact even though it was shut down, because of our pre-publicity. We knew the government was going to stop it, so we didn’t let word get out in Bangladesh beforehand, but we let people in North America know. When the show opened [in Dhaka], we live streamed it, so when the police came to shut us down, all that was being filmed.

Photos were taken at night, when the crimes occurred, as recalled by victims’ friends and families. (Shahidul Alam)

LN: Why did you decide to show this work in the US?

A representation of water boarding from the victim’s perspective. (Shahidul Alam)

Alam: Well, we’ve learned that the U.S. and UK governments have been training RAB. Water boarding was new to us. They’ve also been providing arms. The prime minister in the UK has had to answer questions about this in Parliament, but the issue hasn’t been raised in the U.S. We’re hoping that this show will engage with the diaspora here.

LN: What are your thoughts on the ethics of photographing disasters and conflicts?

Alam: I’m a storyteller. I try to tell stories sensitively, humanely. You have to ask yourself what your motives are. Are you doing what you’re doing to inform people, to bring about change? Or is your primary goal to win awards and sensationalize? When picture-taking becomes part of a voyeuristic exercise and commodity, then it is a problem. When people fly into another country thousands of miles away, take photos and leave, it’s a problem. They don’t know enough about the language, the political and cultural sensibilities, and often there’s a pre-determined editorial point of view that the photographer is only supporting, unlike a local photographer, who is answerable to the community. The farmer in the paddy field knows the most about the situation. The local photographer knows something about the situation. The person who knows the least is the picture editor in New York. But the photo editor gets the most say, and the farmer has zero say, in how the story is told.

Interview of passersby as well as the police who shut down Crossfire exhibition from Shahidul Alam on Vimeo (includes English subtitles).

Opening reception at Queen’s Museum of Art

Beware, Hillary Clinton’s a warmonger!

Shahidul Alam — Sun, 06 May 2012 04:05:41 +0000

by rahnuma ahmed

The US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton while on a surprise visit to embattled Libya, shows the V-sign as she poses with NATO-funded Libyan “rebels.” October 2011.

The US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton while on a surprise visit to embattled Libya, shows the V-sign as she poses with NATO-funded Libyan "rebels.” October 2011.

The US secretary of State Hillary Clinton is coming to Dhaka today, on a two day visit. Press reports inform us that her initial itinerary had involved attending the fourth round of US-China Strategic and Economic Dialogue in Beijing on May 3-4. That, the decision to visit Bangladesh (May 4-5) and India (May 7-8) was “sudden.” A ”surprise stopover.”

Ms Clinton’s visit to Beijing was preceded by the Chinese dissident Chen Guangcheng’s escape from house arrest to the US Embassy; while the western media furore has abated somewhat after US officials stepped in and brokered a deal on his behalf with the Chinese government, deep concern in western circles over his safety and security continue to be expressed.

Forty-year old blind Chinese dissident Chen Guangcheng — who has suffered intimidation, beatings, jail and extralegal house arrest — escaped from being confined at home on April 22, 2012 and took refuge in the US embassy. He has since been escorted to a Beijing hospital where he was reunited with his family. The deal was brokered by US officials with the Chinese government. Chen’s release led Hillary Clinton to state, ”I am pleased that we were able to facilitate Chen Guangcheng’s stay and departure from the US Embassy in a way that reflected his choices and our values” (May 2, 2012).

After being released, Chen, on May 3, phoned into a Congressional hearing to detail his predicament. He has also “begged” that he wants to leave China with his family “for the US on Hillary Clinton’s plane.” This has been followed by a Chinese Foreign Affairs Ministry statement on its website which says that the blind human rights activist may apply to “study abroad.” Interestingly, his dramatic journey to the US embassy — described as “mission impossible” — was aided by US officials. The Guangcheng story has generated international headlines; while China experts, journalists and human rights activists discuss how the conflict may be further resolved, Chen has expressed his desire to meet Ms Clinton in person. To seek “more help from her.” To “thank her face to face.” The New York University meanwhile, has been kind enough to extend an invitation to Chen. (ABC News, May 4, 2012).

When Ms Clinton mouths “our values,” one is forced to ask, pray, what may these be? Or, more pointedly, how far do these extend? Whom do they exclude?

Obviously not to the Palestinians, in whose case, as Philip Weiss reminds us, the US chooses its “interests,” over its (purported) “values.” Former State Department official Anne-Marie Slaughter had said this spring, “Whenever I send out a [twitter] message about the suffering, the detention without trial, civilian deaths by armed force in all these countries, I now get messages back that say to me, What about the Palestinians?”

Scores of Palestinian prisoners are on hunger strike presently but not a peep out of the US embassy there. No dramatic “mission impossible” rescue efforts either. Nor do State Department officials dare write about the rights of the Palestinians, when they are in its employ.

Clinton’s “our values” statement also reminds us, writes Weiss, that Israel has blocked the investigation of the massacre of 21 members of the al-Samouni family during the 2009 Operation Cast Lead in Gaza. That the US has helped Israel by quashing the UN’s Goldstone Report which had characterised the attack on the family as a “war crime.”

According to the B’Tselem’s summary of the events that led to the family’s massacre:

“On 4 January 2009, soldiers gathered about 100 members of the extended a-Samuni family in the house of Wael a-Samuni, in the a-Zeitun neighborhood of Gaza City. The next morning, at 6:30 A.M., when a few members of the family tried to leave the house, the military fired a missile or shell at them, killing Muhammad a-Samuni and wounding two other persons. A few seconds later, the military fired two more shells or missiles that hit the house directly. The house collapsed on its occupants, killing 21 persons, including many women and children, and injuring dozens of other family members.”

The Red Cross, B’Tselem and other human rights organisations had repeatedly requested that they be allowed to help remove injured persons, but permission had been granted two days later. By then, four wounded family members had bled to death. Of the 21 killed, nine were children, ranging in ages from 6 months to 16 years (Richard Silverstein, “IDF Closes Book on al-Samouni Killings, Whitewashes Massacre,” May 3, 2012).

On May 2, 2012 the Israel Defence Forces (IDF) informed B’Tselem that it intended to close the investigation. While “mistakes [had been] made [which had] led to unfortunate consequences,” these had been “inadvertent.” In other words, “not culpable.”

Similar bouts of amnesia which exclude people selectively from “our values” occurred when Ms Clinton, while testifying before a Senate committee on February 28, 2012, stated that Syria’s president Bashar al-Assad could be branded a “war criminal.”

“Based on definitions of war criminal and crimes against humanity, there would be an argument to be made that he [Assad] would fit into that category.”

But this is part of the American political and media establishment’s rhetoric, writes Bill Van Auken, aimed at winning western public support for “yet another imperialist intervention in the Middle East.” A regime change venture dressed up as a “crusade for human rights.”

When the US Secretary of State speaks of war criminals and war crimes, which definition does she rely on? It could well be the International Criminal Court’s legislation, largely drawn from the Nuremberg tribunal, where war crimes are defined as a number of acts—including murder, extermination, torture, imprisonment and enforced disappearance of persons—knowingly “committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population…” (Bill Van Auken, Hillary Clinton and Middle East War Crimes, Global Research, March 3, 2012).

Further, it could well be that the urge to define Assad as a war criminal gained ground after the 27-day seige of the Baba Amr neighbourhood of Homs, seized by armed militias, who, it must be noted, abducted and murdered non-Sunni residents of the city — had ended. The US-backed rebels were forced to pull out on March 1, since Syrian military strength had proven to be superior.

Hundreds of Syrians were undoubtedly killed in the month-long siege. Many of them had been unarmed civilians.

But when twenty times as many unarmed civilians had been killed over a shorter period, only 400 miles away from Homs, had similar outrage been expressed by Ms Clinton?

When the entire city of Fallujah in Iraq had been turned into a free-fire zone? When inhabitants had been warned to leave but men and boys had been turned back? Had been “forced to face an onslaught of napalm, cluster bombs, white phosphorus shells and other munitions” which had incinerated their victims? Had brought their homes crashing down on them?

Of the fifty thousand Fallujans who had been either unwilling or unable to flee, more than 6,000 had died.

Seven years on, Fallujans suffer an “epidemic of birth defects, childhood cancers and other ailments caused by depleted uranium shells and other ordnance dumped on the city.”

There are greater war criminals around than Syria’s Assad. Before you start pointing fingers, make sure your hands are clean.

While it is true that the Bush administration was in power when the Falluja massacre had taken place, it is also true that one woman had agreed with all the lies uttered by president Bush, as a YouTube video available here demonstrates http://prisonplanet.com/articles/november2007/271107Warmonger.htm.

Bush: [the] Iraqi regime possesses biological and chemical weapons (July 10, 2002).

Hillary Clinton: Saddam Hussein has worked, rebuilt his chemical and biological weapon stock (October 10, 2002).

Bush: Saddam Hussein aids and protects terrorists including members of al-Qaeda (January 28, 2003).

Hillary Clinton: He [Saddam] has also given aid, comfort and sanctuary to terrorists including al-Qaeda members (October 10, 2002).

Bush: [the] regime is seeking a nuclear bomb (January 28, 2003).

Hillary Clinton: and [Saddam] will, keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. So, it is with conviction that I support this resolution as being in the best interest of our nation, it is a vote that puts awesome responsibility in the hands of our President (October 10, 2002).

Bush: this war will end in the defeat of totalitarians (August 31, 2006).

Hillary Clinton: any vote that might lead to war should be hard. But I cast it with conviction (October 10, 2002).

It is also true that Hillary Clinton later lied. That, as a Democratic contendor for the post of president in the 2008 elections, she had said, “If I had been president in October of 2002, I would never have asked for authority to divert our attention from Afghanistan to Iraq and I certainly would never have started this war.”

Hillary Clinton’s feminism has been called to question as well, for, when servile commentators gush over her “feminist foreign policy”, over how she “has gone out of her way to press feminist issues” — the growing gender imbalance in China because of the high abortion rate of female foetuses, sexual violence as a weapon of war (Democratic Republic of Congo), the need to provide clean cooking stoves to save women from smoke inhalation which kills 1.9 million per year (Madeleine Bunting, “Clinton is proving that a feminist foreign policy is possible — and works,” Guardian, January 16, 2011), others point out how, over 4 million Iraqis, mostly women and children, have been turned into refugees. How, Ms Clinton seems gung-ho ready to do it to Iranian women as well, having recently warned Iran that time is “running out for diplomacy” (Guardian, March 31, 2012).

Despite the fact that the IAEA’s latest reports on Iran’s nuclear programmes, and congressional testimony from the director of National Intelligence, asserts that “there is no strong evidence that Iran has decided to restart its nuclear program” (Reuters, March 23, 2012).

Warmonger, or, maybe, as some insist, a war criminal? I leave it to you to decide.
————————
Published in New Age, Monday, May 5, 2012, a special writeup on the occasion of Hillary Clinton’s visit to Bangladesh.

Hillary Clinton’s address to Bangladeshi youth. Live at www.drik.tv at 11:00 am BST. 6th May 2012

The Borders of the Global Village

Shahidul Alam — Thu, 03 May 2012 10:18:29 +0000

THE BORDERS OF THE GLOBAL VILLAGE

Guerilla Internet: Using the Net to fight its own dominance

The Internet can be a subversive tool. It remains the only medium which gives scope – relatively inexpensively, and without the support of the gatekeepers – for a lone voice to be heard. It is this unique characteristic that we have to nurture. The bigger players have the money, the clout, the physical strength and the social control to bludgeon their way through, but they do not have the flexibility, the ability to pop up and disappear at will, the speed of action or the elasticity to slip through the holes, that the well trained individual has. Given the important proviso of access, the Net is fast, cheap, and difficult to stop. It is the Net that we must use, to fight its own dominance.

Shahidul Alam is Jury-member of THE BOBs Deutsche Welle Blog Awards and speaks on the panel presented in cooperation with Deutsche Welle.

Author and DW journalist Cyrus Farivar offers food for thought in his book, “The Internet of Elsewhere.” He writes, “When the Internet arrives, it bumps up against various preexisting political, economic, social and cultural histories and contexts – and often what comes out are rather surprising results.” That’s the backdrop for a discussion by the expert and BOBs juror Shahidul Alam, who explores complex intersections between the Internet and society by looking at the example of Bangladesh.

Keynote address at 6:00 pm at the re-publica, Berlin, at 6:00 pm. 3rd May 2012. STATION-Berlin
Luckenwalder Straße 4-6. 10963 Berlin

This panel is presented in cooperation with Deutsche Welle.

Interview (in Bangla) by Debarati Guha

Questions for Abu Sufian?

Bangladeshi blogger Abu Sufian wins “Reporters Without Borders” Category Award in Best of Blogs contest

Shahidul Alam — Wed, 02 May 2012 16:47:30 +0000

Jury reaches a verdict – actually six of them

Deutsche Welle MAY 2, 2012

BANGLADESHI BLOGGER WINS “REPORTERS WITHOUT BORDERS” CATEGORY AWARDS

Bangladeshi blogger Abu Sufian

Bangladeshi journalist Abu Sufian’s blog about extrajudicial executions and other kinds of injustice is the jury choice in the “Reporters Without Borders” category of this year’s BOBs (Best of Blogs competition), organized by the German radio station Deutsche Welle. It was was chosen from 11 finalists by an international jury consisting of bloggers and a Reporters Without Borders representative.

A reporter for the bdnews24.com website, Sufian exposes himself to threats and considerable danger to provide detailed investigative coverage of extrajudicial executions, a problem that the government denies and the traditional media largely ignore, although the victims number in the thousands. He won an award from a national journalists’ organization in 2006.

His reporting has included coverage of last February’s murder of husband-and-wife journalists Sagar Sarowar and Meherun Runi, which has prompted unprecedented protests and joint demands for justice by Bangladeshi journalists and bloggers. He is also campaigning for a “right to information” law that would force the government to be more transparent.

Life is not easy for journalists in Bangladesh, which is ranked 129th out of 179 countries in the press freedom index that Reporters Without Borders published in January. The editors of two newspapers were recently threatened with death and reprisals, privately-owned TV stations are harassed and the authorities did not hesitate to threaten journalists in March.

Detailed reporting on Deutsche Welle Bangla website (in Bangla)

Our 12 jury members decided on the winners of the 2012 BOBs! After sifting through 3,200 you had a chance to choose the winners the BOBs’ User Prizes in 17 categories and 11 languages. And after an exciting month of voting, the winners have been decided, so go check them out!

In addition to the User Prizes, the jury of bloggers, media experts and activists also got shut into a conference room for a day to cure the best blogs, and campaigns and media project in the main six multilingual categories.

Blogger and journalist Arash Sigarchi was this year’s big winner, taking the Jury Award for Best Blog with “Window of Anguish,” where he writes about human rights, social and political topics about his homeland. Window of Anguish is widely read inside and outside of Iran for its objective view of current events. Currently in Washington, Sigarchi maintains close connections to many sources in Iran.

This year’s other Jury Awards went to:

Best Social Activism Campaign
Free Syrian Blogger& Activist Razan Ghazzawi

Special Topic Award Education and Culture
Fasokan

Best Use of Technology for Social Good
Harassmap

Best Video Channel
Kuang Kuang Kuang

Reporters Without Borders Award
Abu Sufian’s Blog

Our thanks and congratulations go out to all the Jury Award winners for their amazing and inspiring work. We’re looking forwarding to meeting you at next month’s Deutsche Welle Global Media Forum in Bonn, Germany.

Update April 30, 2012: Reclaiming Jahangirnagar from a ‘godfather’ VC

Shahidul Alam — Mon, 30 Apr 2012 17:07:27 +0000

by rahnuma ahmed

Injured Jahangirnagar Shangskritik Jote activist, beaten up by 'VC League' members. New Age Photo

The Awami League-isation of public universities, of which Jahangirnagar is a prime example, has entered a critical stage.

And so, has resistance.

The ‘godfather’ VC, professor Sharif Enamul Kabir, who had been besieged by teachers protesting under the banner of Shikkhok Shomaj (Teachers Society) for 32 hours, called on his coterie of supportive teachers, to come and rescue him. A special bus, under ‘administrative orders’, was sent to Dhaka on April 27 which was Friday, the weekly holiday, to pick up a hundred or so university teachers. A three hundred strong police force from Savar stood impassively by the backdoor entrance to his residence, as the VC finally ventured out. Trying to appear nonchalant, he chatted with both on- and off-campus university teachers, who milled around him cluckingly. When the agitating teachers whose lockout had been centred around the main entrance tried to prevent professor Kabir from leaving the grounds of his official residence, the police force intervened.

Guarded by his rescue team of teachers and police, the vice-chancellor trooped over to the Administration Building to attend an emergency meeting of the Syndicate, the university’s chief executive body.

The Syndicate ruled that all demonstrations outside the administration building and in the campus’s residential area were henceforth banned. It fast-forwarded the university’s summer vacations; instead of beginning on June 1 as scheduled, they would start from May 5.

After the Syndicate meeting was over, the vice-chancellor returned to his residence just as he had forged ahead to attend it. Guarded by teachers loyal to him. By police entrusted with protecting him.

According to press reports, the rescue efforts of Awami League teachers has seemingly set off a signal. Students belonging to the Bangladesh Chatra League (the ruling Awami League’s student group) who are loyal to the vice-chancellor — dubbed the “VC League” by the media — have now launched a campaign of violence and attacks against Shikkhok Shomaj’s teachers (Kaler Kantho, April 28, 2012).

The VC League brought out processions on Friday, its members vandalised and set fire to ‘We reject the VC’ stage which had been set up by the agitating teachers. On Saturday, they snatched away an effigy of the vice-chancellor. Fortunately, for them, they didn’t burn it. They had the wits to realise this one wouldn’t go down well with the ‘godfather’!

The arrest of two teachers has heated up campus protests. The teachers had allegedly assaulted the department’s chairperson professor Mohammad Ali Akand, loyal to the VC, on Wednesday afternoon (April 25). The latter filed a case against seven teachers at Ashulia thana the same night; the police soon turned up, an hour or two after midnight, and arrested professor Talim Hossain and associate professor Nuh Alam.

Similar speed and efficiency on the part of the police had been noticeably lacking when Zubair Ahmed, a final year English student, was mauled and beaten to death by factional rivals of the BCL on January 9, 2012.

Leaders of the teacher’s association (JUTA) and other teachers went to the police station early Thursday morning; they managed to secure the release of the two botanists. Outraged at the arrest of the teachers, made suspect by the fact that both are active members of Shikkhok Shomaj, the agitating teachers decided to camp outside the VC residence. To not decamp until he had resigned.

According to professor Talim Hossain, the police didn’t have any arrest warrant, they’d been arrested because of instructions from higher-ups. An allegation apparently confirmed by the police superintendent of Dhaka district Mizanur Rahman when he said rather obliquely, “the university administration was in agreement” (Samakal, April 28, 2012).

The VC League then set to work on the students.

Cultural activists belonging to the Jahangirnagar Shangskritik Jote had brought out a procession on Friday evening demanding the return of normalcy to their campus. In a brief rally which followed the procession, students said that the vice-chancellor’s failure to provide leadership had adversely affected academic life. Lectures and examinations had become uncertain. The VC had not attended office for the last two weeks. Although he was moving around now, he was able to do so only under police protection. The present state of affairs was untenable. Students also condemned the VC League’s acts of vandalism. They protested against irregularities, corruption and partisanship in room distribution and before dispersing locked up the office of the director of the Teacher-Students Centre.

The VC league swung into action on Saturday, April 28, 2012. As I write, I am reminded of the slogan “Direct Action,” raised by BCL activists in 1998, when we had been protesting against campus rape by student leaders of Jahangirnagar university’s BCL, which then too, was the student wing of the ruling party because the Awami League had been in power. Staccato chants of Direct action by throngs of male party activists, some of them armed, as they paced up and down the bricklaid pathways of Jahangirnagar, had been scary for protesting women faculty and female students alike; some of us had been left wondering whether we had heard muffled voices of Direct dhorshon (rape) underlying the chants. Both slogans resonate in my head as I write now, fourteen years later.

Processions were repeatedly brought out on Saturday. Macho thuggery on display; armed as well, according to press reports (Samokal, April 29, 2012). Things turned violent when the VC League attacked and beat up Jote’s cultural activists with metal rods, targeting Koli Mahmud, its president, and then swooping down on others — Moin Muntasir Kartik, Toufiqul Islam Arno, Sushanto, Sudip Bhattacharya, Fariduddin Masud. Koli’s hands are severely injured, bones possibly broken.

The attack on the Jote had occurred in front of the Central library in the early afternoon. When reporters who had been attending the Shikkhok Shomaj’s press conference, rushed to the scene they discovered a chaotic scene. Wounded, bloodied cultural activists, being helped to the university medical centre, friends and classmates weeping and crying out, anger, rage and helplessness all around. When the press appeared, members of the VC league dispersed, only to re-group at a nearby spot minutes later. Some of them followed those wounded to the Jahangirnagar Medical Centre, beating them all over again.

But unintended consequences (by the VC League) have happened.

Within an hour of the attack on Jote members, cultural activists and general students brought out a procession under the banner of Shontrasher Biruddhe Jahangirnagar (Jahangirnagar United Against Terror) from one of the women’s halls of residence; within ten minutes, the VC league brought out a counter-procession. The students procession marched up to the Shikkhok Shomaj encampment outside the VC’s residence, and declared their solidarity with what had, until now, been exclusively a teacher-based movement against the ‘godfather.’

Threats, intimidation and violence occurred deep into Saturday night. According to eyewitness reports, a power outage occurred at 9pm. It could have been regular load-shedding except that the police force, standing guard outside the vice-chancellor’s residence, mysteriously disappeared immediately after the lights went off. Within fifteen minutes, two groups of VC League thugs came from two different directions and surrounded the striking teachers and students. Even though the teachers had risen up and formed a human chain in order to protect the students, the thugs broke into it and assaulted the students. Two faculty members were hurt, their clothes were ripped off. Brickbats hurled by the BCL activists injured five students.

When BCL activists had earlier been asked why they had assaulted Jote members, some had replied, some Islami Chatra Shibir members have infiltrated the Jote. They are waging a movement so as to destabilise the campus. When campus reporters had wanted to know whether Shondipon Chakravarty Shudipto (Hindu, by name), was a Shibir activist, they had, at first, refused to reply, only to mumble later, we don’t know if anyone by that name has been injured.

Reporters had pressed further, since all activities of the JU-BCL have been suspended by the BCL’s Central Committee, how can you possibly be organising and protesting under the Chatra League’s banner? One of the local leaders Sheikh Shahidul had replied, the central committee knows the central committee’s decisions (Meaning what? That they are not bothered by it? That they are not obliged to follow it? And after all, why should they, for, as I had written earlier, they have been empowered by, and follow only, the godfather VC’s dictates). What a godforsaken mess. A vice-chancellor has superseded the Chatra League high command; the central Chatra League’s top-ranking leaders, no innocents themselves, have been over-ridden by a vice-chancellor who has built up his own personal cadre of League goons — all leading to a macabre situation which the former have been forced to sit and watch helplessly.

Shikkhok Shomaj has refused to comply with the Syndicate’s decisions, terming them undemocratic. Naseem Akhter Hussain, convenor, has laughed off accusations that she and other members of the Shikkhok Shomaj are reactionary, they are supporters of the Jamaat-e-Islami, are opposed to the war crimes trial. As has the Jahangirnagar Shangskritik Jote, which, as everyone knows, has been at the forefront of campus-based cultural movements — particularly in the field of theatre — fighting against autocracy and repression.

But the godfather and his coterie, whether VC League students, or teachers grouped under the banner, Bangabandhur Adorsho O Progotisheel Shikkhok Shomaj, guarding the VC entrance faithfully — are not to be blamed. ‘If you are not with us, you must be a war crimes supporter,’ has been the ruling Awami League’s trump card since they returned to power in January 2009.

But the power to define — which was usurped by the League, which was perpetuated and maintained through the deployment of ideological and coercive forces, for the sake of its survival and aggrandisement, as Jahangirnagar illustrates so well – no longer rests with the ruling party.

The sooner they cotton on to reality, the lesser will be the rude shock that awaits them.

—————

Published in New Age, Monday, April 30, 2012

RAILWAYGATE SCAM

Shahidul Alam — Thu, 26 Apr 2012 03:52:32 +0000

Nabbed by the `black cat’, instead…

By rahnuma ahmed

The so-called ‘black cat’ which the railway minister Suranjit Sengupta had promised to nab after his appointment in November 2011, seems to have nabbed him instead.

Tall promises made by the veteran parliamentarian, who had become a cabinet minister for the first time in a political career that spanned more than half a century — now lie exposed as hollow. After a mere less-than-five-months in office.

The “black” cat (like “black” money, “black”mail) — a metaphor born of racialised cultural ideas, has struck back. Taken revenge. Publicly.

As `Railwaygate’ scam unfolds, propaganda agents of the government — including top-ranking ministers — have made frantic attempts to disentangle the government’s image from the skeins of financial corruption and bribery which bedevil it. But not only have all attempts at resuscitation failed, each one has led to increased suspicion in its wake, has helped raise more questions than answered, thereby ensnarling the government further. Fingers caught in the till have not only remained unextricated, but frozen — as in ‘caught in the act’ — beneath swathes of inconsistencies, lies and deceit.

The latest scam story has possibly inflicted the greatest damage, leaving the government’s 2008 electoral pledge of fighting against coruption in shambles. In utter disrepute.

For how often is a minister’s APS, accompanied by two senior officials, discovered with a bag stuffed with 7 million takas in cash in the middle of the night (April 9-10, 2012)? Reportedly on their way to the minister’s house, with the APS’s personal car bearing the lawmaker’s sticker? How often does one hear that the driver had deliberately driven into the Bangladesh Border Guards (BGB) Headquarters in Pilkhana, had pulled up and yelled `bags of black money, stop, thief’? (conflicting press reports exist over whether he’d demanded a share of the loot, or had insisted that unsuccessful job-seekers be returned their bribe money).

How often do such a string of incidents follow? The four, who had been detained — Suranjit’s close aide and political appointee Omar Faruq Talukder, Railway General Manager (East)Yusuf Ali Mridha, Chief security commandant Enamul Huq, and the driver, Ali Azam — were soon released.

Azam, however (who had belled the cat?) has since, ‘disappeared’. He remains missing. His family is deeply worried. I’m as shocked as everyone else is.

BGB personnel had informed the police, had requested that the four be taken into custody. But the police had declined on the grounds that no case had been filed.

And hence, the three walked out. Sauntered away. With the bag of loot. Free? Scotfree? Faruq tried to brazen it out at first, the money was for his sister’s wedding. But unfortunately, for him, no one bought the story. How had he acquired such a staggering amount? Surely not from legitimate earnings? Suranjit made matters worse by rushing to his defence. It was Faruq’s personal money. Azam had conspired to abduct and blackmail him.

Faruq was suspended from service only after the the scandal could no longer be contained (on 11th morning).

Press reports, incriminating ones, soon followed. Railway sources divulged that a corrupt nexus existed which included the Railway Sramik League, ministers, lawmakers, ruling party leaders, and a section of corrupt railway officials (a chain of fat cats?). Recruitment had recently begun for 7,500 people, “Tk. 2 lakh to Tk. 5 lakh is being taken from each candidate” (Daily Star, April 12). A nine-member team is entrusted with collecting and delivering the bribe to the GM (Kaler Kantho, April 12). Father-in-law (Mridha) and his son-law (railway divisional engineer Arman Hossain) control the job ‘trade’ and tender bidding ‘trade’ for construction and purchases in the eastern sector (Samokal, April 12). Faruq owns a flat in Dhaka city, has 3 cars at his disposal, is the owner of a 32 lakh taka private car (Samokal, April 12). Security chief Enamul says, the car was headed for the minister’s home (Samokal, April 12). Six other railway officials live in the GM’s bungalow in Chittagong, despite having been allotted houses individually in Dhaka city. ‘The money was raised in the minister’s name’ (Kaler Kantho, April 14).

Suranjit tried first to save his skin by claiming victim status. Vested interests had hatched the plot. They had conspired against him because he was ridding the newly-created Railways ministry of corruption (his famous kalo beral).

Two probe committees were formed, but both have failed to gain the slightest bit of public esteem and confidence, headed as they are by railway ministry officials themselves: joint secretary (administration) is looking into allegations against Mridha, while the minister’s personal secretary is entrusted with investigating Faruq’s involvement.

Suranjit had tried another tack, he had appeared non-committal. Its no big deal, if the situation demands, I will resign immediately (April 12).

But his stance soon changed. There’s no question of resigning, the allegations are not against me. The incident is “motivated.” Dishonest bureaucrats, corrupt contractors and communal forces have ganged up against me (BBC interview, reported in Samokal, April 13).

Resign he did, later. After the prime minister, reportedly “furious” at Suranjit, returned from her three day official visit to Turkey, and hauled him up for a meeting (April 15).

At a jam-packed press conference the next day, Suranjit had the gall to claim that by tendering his resignation he would be making history, “I want to create a unique instance in the politics of Bangladesh.” Not many politicians, he added, have the fortune of setting such a stellar example. Cooee.

But there were superior claimants to history-making. Sajeda Chowdhury, presidium member of the Awami League and deputy leader of the House crowed, “Our Prime Minister has created… history [by] taking action [in this] matter, [it has taken us a ] step forward on [the] journey to democracy” (BSS, April 17).

The step towards democracy however, flip-flopped many steps backwards in less than 24 hours when Suranjit returned to the cabinet as “minister without a portfolio.” Rumors abound that Big Brothers across the border have insisted that Suranjit be brought back. If so, it will only serve to inflame the fires further, public anger at border killings, at Tipaimukh dam, transit, takeovers of business enterprises and more, fusing together more forcefully to mark off the present government as one held in clientage to India.

The corruption story has grown knottier with news of Suranjit’s son, Soumen Sengupta, having been awarded a gateway licence worth Taka 50 million by Bangladesh Telecommunication Regulatory Commission (BTRC). The fees was paid between March 2 and April 2; he received the licence two days after Railway gate broke out. Soumen had worked for an IT firm, drawing a monthly salary of 50,000 takas, hence similar questions arose as they did for Faruq: where did Soumen get the money to pay for the licence? Where does he hope to get the additional 300 million taka needed to set up the telecom company?

Leading members of the opposition, noticeably pleased at the government’s disarray caused by Railway gate, have sat and smirked despite repeated reminders by commentators and analysts (not that we needed much reminding) about Hawa Bhaban, from where the former prime minister Khaleda Zia’s prodigal son Tareque Rahman, known also as the ‘ten percent man,’ had run a shadow government while she had been in power (2001-2006).

The opposition had smirked despite being reminded of the BNP-Jamaat led government’s cabinet ministers, infamous for corruption, Barrister Nazmul Huda, Mirza Abbas, Barrister Aminul Huq, Barrister Moudud Ahmed… Until Ilias Ali, the BNP’s organising secretary went missing in the early hours of Wednesday, April 18.

The BNP’s acting secretary-general Mirza Fakhrul Islam has alleged that the abduction was a diversion tactic, to turn public attention away from the “cash scandal.” Sunday’s nationwide shutdown would be called off if Ilias was produced before the party, and his family. Sheikh Hasina had earlier insisted that Ilias has ‘self-disappeared.’

Since Ilias has remained missing, the BNP has gone ahead with its strike, the first one this year. It has received the support of its allies in the newly-floated 18 party alliance, formed obviously with the national elections looming ahead in 2013.

More than one independent analyst has expressed misgivings about the flurry of events. Is there more to it than meets the eye? Are there hidden forces at work, beyond even the government’s control? If its true, one can only blame the government for having made things exceptionally easy for them.

The Railway gate scam has probably proobably made things easy for the “good governance” folks as well. For those who, despite the virtual explosion of corruption, financial fraud, ripoffs, bailouts, particularly in the US, persist in displaying an utter failure to think critically. To, not raise questions like, hey, but what went wrong with tackling corruption at home? How could the 2008 crash in the US happen? How come those who were responsible for it, have not only gone scot-free, but have been financially rewarded to boot? How come ordinary American taxpayers who have lost jobs, savings and homes, are now facing higher taxes and spending cuts? And, more crucially, does following the good governance model that you tout for us here, to “improve the climate for business and investments,” to “increase public confidence in government institutions” basically mean creating conditions more conducive for international capital, and not initiate pro-people programmes for the majority (like increased public spending, more subsidies)? For, if it had been the other way round, how could ordinary Americans (the 99%) have gotten ripped-off?

But lacking critical thinking faculties or gumption, or both, we will probably be served ever more roundtables, workshops, seminars, symposiums, press briefings where development experts will expound further on the benefits of good-governance-style anti-corruption, will persist in pontificating on the symptoms of the malaise, remaining persistently blind to its deep-rooted, structural causes. Will refuse to talk back and think independently, because they wouldn’t want to bite the hand that feeds them.

Black or white, nabbing no cat seems easy for those with their hands in some till or the other.

—————————

Revised copy. Earlier version published in New Age, Monday, April 23, 2012

World Press Photo arrives in Dhaka

Shahidul Alam — Tue, 24 Apr 2012 19:51:41 +0000

Fatima al-Qaws cradles her son Zayed (18), who is suffering from the effects of tear gas after participating in a street demonstration, in Sanaa, Yemen, on 15 October. World Press Photo of the Year and People in the News, 1st prize singles, Samuel Aranda/NOOR for The New York Times

Drik in cooperation with the Embassy of the Kingdom of the Netherlands, Dhaka, have pleasure in inviting you to the opening of the World Press Photo 12 exhibition at Drik Gallery, on Thursday, 26 April 2012, 5.30 pm. After the launch in Amsterdam on the 20th April 2012, this is the first public viewing of the exhibition, which will also be launched in Poland, Spain, Portugal and Italy in April 2012.

A leopard attacks a forest warden after escaping from the Mahananda Wildlife Sanctuary, in West Bengal, India.. 2012, Spot News, Honorable Mention singles. Salil Bera. The Week/Majority World

The exhibition honours the prizewinners of World Press Photo’s 55th Photo Contest.

Rebels battle for Ras Lanuf, an oil-refining town on the Libyan coast, on 11 March. Spot News, 1st prize singles, Yuri Kozyrev. Noor Images for Time

The exhibition will be on at Drik Gallery till 18 May 2012, everyday from 3-8 pm.

Drik Gallery
House 58, Road 15A (New)
Dhanmondi, Dhaka-1209, Bangladesh
Tel: 880-2-9120125, 8112954, 8123412
Email: office@drik.net

Programme

5:30        Welcome Address by Shahidul Alam, Managing Director, Drik
5:40        Address by H.M. Ambassador Alphons Hennekens, Kingdom of the Netherlands
5:50        Address by Femke van der Valk, Coordinator Exhibitions, World Press Photo
6:00        Address by Nurul Kabir, Editor, New Age, Guest of Honour
6:10        Vote of Thanks by Abir Abdullah, The Jury Member, World Press Photo 2011

About World Press Photo

World Press Photo is an independent, nonprofit organisation based in Amsterdam, committed to supporting and advancing high standards in photojournalism and documentary photography worldwide.

Each year, an independent international jury, consisting of nineteen members, judges the entries in nine different categories, submitted by photojournalists, agencies, newspapers and magazines from all corners of the world. This year’s competition attracted 5,247 photographers from 124 countries. In total 101,254 images were entered in the contest.

The annual exhibition is shown this year at about 100 venues all over the world. This year’s exhibition contains over 160 photographs. It is an annual public showcase for photojournalism comprising the year’s winning photo, together with award-winning images from each of the nine contest categories.

About Drik

Drik is a distinctive multimedia organisation that has made challenging social inequality its central driving force. Established in Bangladesh in 1989, Drik has successfully partnered with national and international organisations using the power of the visual medium to educate, inform and draw powerful emotional responses to influence public opinion. The Picture Library, the Photography, Publications, Audio-Visual and Gallery departments work in synergy to carry out the work of the company. It’s ability and influence is strengthened by its initiatives, the Pathshala South Asian Media Academy, DrikICT, Chobi Mela International Festival of Photography and the Majority World Photo Agency.

Drik Gallery was opened in August 1993 with the first showing of World Press Photo in Bangladesh. There is a story behind the scenes. Bangladesh was in the midst of a massive democratic movement in the late eighties. On the streets, through curfews and through tear gas, Drik was documenting events in their entirety. Throughout this period, the major galleries, either state owned or belonging to foreign embassies, were not prepared to exhibit Drik’s work, since it was ‘political’. Drik knew it had to build its own gallery. The first ever staging of World Press provided the perfect opportunity. Drik gathered its resources and built what is now, one of the finest galleries in South Asia and the largest private gallery in Bangladesh.

Imagining our Future Together: A Call for South Asia Artists to Share Your Art!

Shahidul Alam — Wed, 18 Apr 2012 23:08:55 +0000

SUBMITTED BY SOUTH ASIA ON TUE, 04/03/2012 – 15:59

Are you a South Asian artist from Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan, or Sri Lanka and born in or after 1975?

You are invited to share examples of your work for the exhibition South Asia Artists: Imagining Our Future Together.

Imagining our Future Together is a juried group exhibition that will be on display in throughout South Asia and beyond.

Concept

The concept of the exhibition comes from the realization that cooperation among the countries of South Asia is the key to the region’s success in the 21st century. And what better example of transcending borders and breaking stereotypes can be seen than in art created by emerging artists, some of our society’s most perceptive, creative and genuine minds?

Imagining our Future Together is an opportunity to communicate your experience, feelings and thoughts as visual artist to the rest of the world.

How to Apply?

For detailed guidelines, please see the call for entry.

Email or send by post the entry form by April 30, 2012, to be considered for an international art show inspired by a vision of a better common future in South Asia. The application is free of charge and open to all eligible artists.

The deadline for submissions is April 30, 2012

Selection Process:

A selection committee will select the artwork for the exhibition.

We will inform the selected artists and organize packing and shipping of their artwork.

The World Bank will pay for the packing and transportation of art at no expense to the artists.

Contact:

For further questions, please contact:
Elena Grant, World Bank Art Program: artsar@worldbank.org.
Telephone: +1 (202) 458-7320, fax: +1 (202) 522-3239.

The exhibition is made possible by the World Bank Regional Vice Presidency for South Asia and curated by the World Bank Art Program.