Tareque Masud and Mishuk Munier amongst five killed in road accident.

Drik mourns the death of two dear friends, the injuries of three others and the numerous deaths of their colleagues and the thousands of uncounted others who regularly die as a result of negligence, corruption and the wanton irresponsibility of those who are in charge of keeping our roads safe.

Tareque Masud, one of the finest film makers this nation has produced. Mishuk Munier, a talented cameraperson and a media professional who had both the dreams and the ability to change the way reporting was done, died a brutal death as they were returning to Dhaka having chosen the location for their next film.

Catherine, Tareque’s equally talented wife, the producer of the Oscar nominated film Matir Moina, artist Dhali Al Mamoon, who had given the inaugural Golam Kasem Daddy lecture on Drik’s 20th anniversary, and his painter wife Dilara Begum Jolly are in hospital recovering from multiple injuries. Dhali’s condition is critical.

Obituary on Guardian UK

Awards Ceremony

Award ceremony Invitation card

Learning Rights to Make a Difference

Human Rights Training for Journalists in Bangladesh

Drik and INTERNEWS network request the pleasure of your company at the Awards Ceremony of ‘Learning Rights to Make a Difference’ a human rights training for journalists in Bangladesh on Thursday 11 August, 2011 at 5:00 pm at Drik Gallery, Dhaka.

Participating organisations: Daily Shokaler Khobor, Daily Sun, Prothom Alo, The Independent, Independent Television,Diganta Television, Odhikar, New Age, The New Nation, The Daily Ittefaq, Dhaka Courier, UNB, BLAST, Daily Inquilab,ASK, Boishakhi TV, BNHRC

The event will be live-streamed on Drik TV

Chief Guest
Dr. Mizanur Rahman
Chairman, National Human Rights Commission, Bangladesh

Guest of Honour
Mr. Nurul Kabir
Editor, New Age

Selected work of the 17 mainstream journalists who participated in the human rights training course will be presented at this event.

Programme

Drik Gallery, Dhaka ◆ 11 August 2011 ◆ Thursday

5:00 pm (GMT +6): Audiovisual Documentation of ‘Learning Rights to Make a Difference’
5:05 pm: Welcome by Shahidul Alam
5:15 pm: Presentation of Electronic Report
5:20 pm: Speech by participant (electronic)
5:25 pm: Speech by participant (print)
5:30 pm: Speech by participant (photography)
5:35 pm: Speech by Guest of Honour

5:45 pm: Speech by Chief Guest
5:55 pm: Awards Presentation
6:20 pm: Vote of Thanks by Shahidul Alam

Journalists play an important role as both, providers of information to the public and as a resource for human rights defenders demanding accountability amongst all those who wield power in the public and private domain. Shahidul Alam, Managing Director of Drik at the opening address of the training course said, “With Bangladesh gaining geopolitical importance, many forces are at play and human rights violations have dramatically escalated with perpetrators operating with impunity. Trained journalists will play a vital role in challenging the abuse of power.”

Journalists’ right to information and the right to report are the lifeblood of their profession. However, reporting on human rights issues that plague any country is a formidable task for many. The journalists often come under threats and unwarranted arrests leading to abuse by the very authorities that have been elected to provide and protect their human rights.

Drik as a premier visual media communication provider and an organisation committed to social justice, has always aspired to make Bangladesh a country where people can exercise their right to express dissent peacefully, where information will flow freely and where knowledge and skills needed for individuals to attain their full potential are made available.

The Learning Rights to Make a Difference, human rights training was thus formulated in partnership with Internews Network to train Bangladeshi journalists to learn new skills and examine in depth the special role accurate, fair and professional reporting and analysis play, in upholding human rights and supporting the peaceful resistance to human rights abuses.

The first part of the course from 19-21 July was instructional which used creative, interactive teaching methods, including presentations and discussion by guest lecturers and exchanges with human rights defenders, activists as well as victims. During the second part of the programme the participants were assigned to report on human rights issues under the supervision of trainers and mentors. The final part of the training was a review programme on 8-9 August where the assignments were openly evaluated by the trainers, mentors and the participants themselves.

It is expected that the training will help the journalists contribute towards greater transparency and accountability leading to a more participatory democracy where rights of all citizens are respected.

India and its near-abroad

Too slowly, India is realising that poor relations with its South Asian neighbours hold back its global ambitions

Jul 30th 2011 | from the print edition of the Economist

NO ONE loves a huge neighbour. For all that, India’s relations with the countries that ring it are abysmal. Of the eight with which it shares a land or maritime boundary, only two can be said to be happy with India: tiny Maldives, where India has the only foreign embassy and dispenses much largesse, and Bhutan, which has a policy of being happy about everything. Among its other South Asian neighbours, the world’s biggest democracy is incredible mainly because of its amazing ability to generate wariness and resentment.

Until recently it operated a shoot-to-kill policy towards migrant workers and cattle rustlers along its long border with Bangladesh. Over the years it has meddled madly in Nepal’s internal affairs. In Myanmar India snuggles up to the country’s thuggish dictators, leaving the beleaguered opposition to wonder what happened to India’s championing of democracy. Relations with Sri Lanka are conflicted. It treats China with more respect, but feuds with it about its border.

As for Pakistan, relations are defined by their animosity. One former Indian diplomat likened reconciling the two nuclear-tipped powers to treating two patients whose only disease is an allergy to each other. The observation underscores the fact that it takes two to have bad relations, and to be fair to India plenty of problems press in on it—many of them with their roots in India’s bloody partition in 1947. Pakistan has used a long-running territorial dispute over Kashmir as a reason to launch wars. It also exports terrorism to India, sometimes with the connivance of parts of the Pakistani state. India thinks Bangladesh also harbours India-hating terrorists.

With the notable exception of India’s prime minister, Manmohan Singh, who has heroically persisted in dialogue with Pakistan in the face of provocations and domestic resistance, India’s dealings with its neighbours are mostly driven by arrogance and neglect. It has shared shockingly little of its economic dynamism and new-found prosperity with those around it. Just 5% of South Asia’s trade is within the region.

Too little and too late, the neglect is starting to be replaced by engagement (see article). This week Sonia Gandhi, dynastic leader of India’s ruling Congress Party, visited Bangladesh—a first. And on July 27th India’s foreign minister hosted his Pakistani counterpart, the first such meeting in a year. He promised a “comprehensive, serious and sustained” dialogue.

A new regional engagement is prodded by two things. China’s rapid and increasingly assertive rise challenges India’s own regional dominance. As a foundation for its rise, China pursued a vigorous “smile diplomacy” towards its neighbours that stands in contrast to slothful Indian energies. The smile has sometimes turned to snarl of late (see Banyan). Even so, China’s engagement with its neighbours has allowed it both to prosper and to spread influence.

interactive map displays the various territorial claims of India, Pakistan and China from each country’s perspective

Second, dynamic India can hardly soar globally while mired in its own backyard. Promoting regional prosperity is surely the best way to persuade neighbours that its own rise is more of an opportunity than a threat. Yet India lacks any kind of vision. A region-wide energy market using northern neighbours’ hydropower would transform South Asian economies. Vision, too, could go a long way to restoring ties that history has cut asunder, such as those between Karachi and Mumbai, once sister commercial cities but now as good as on different planets; and Kolkata and its huge former hinterland in Bangladesh. Without development and deeper integration, other resentments will be hard to soothe. It falls on the huge unloved neighbour to make the running.

BBC Documentary on Sino-Indian Rivalry and Bangladesh

http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/podcasts/worldservice/docarchive/docarchive_20100630-1227a.mp3

As government faces increasing criticism over its controversial deal with ConnocoPhillips and pressure mounts to force the government to reveal the contract, an oil spill in China lends weight to the protesters claims that the company has a poor safety record.

ConocoPhillips Halts Oil Operations In Bohai Bay, China

China said Wednesday it had ordered ConocoPhillips to immediately stop operations at several rigs in an area off the nation’s eastern coast polluted by a huge slick.

The 336-square-mile slick emanating from the oil field in Bohai Bay — which ConocoPhillips operates with China’s state-run oil giant CNOOC – has sparked outrage amid allegations of a cover-up.

On Wednesday, the State Oceanic Administration (SOA) said operations would not be allowed to resume before the source of the spill was fully plugged and “risks eliminated,” as fears over the long-term impact on the environment grow.

“There has been oil seeping continuously into the sea for days from platforms B and C in the Penglai 19-3 oil field and there is still a slick in the surrounding marine areas,” the SOA said in a statement.

“Another spill could happen at any time, which has posed a huge threat to the oceanic ecological environment,” it said, adding it had ordered Houston-based ConocoPhillips to stop operations at those platforms.

Spill ‘Basically Under Control’

CNOOC last week said the spill — which was detected on June 4 but only made public at the beginning of July — was “basically under control” while ConocoPhillips told reporters the leaks had been plugged.

The official China Daily newspaper last week said that dead seaweed and rotting fish could be seen in waters around Nanhuangcheng Island near the site of the slick.

It quoted a local fisheries association official as saying the oil leak would have a “long-term” impact on the environment.

CNOOC has been slammed by state media and green groups over the spill, and it emerged on Tuesday that the firm was cleaning up another slick after a breakdown at a rig off the northeast coast.

The state-run giant said the leak was “minor”.

In a separate incident, a CNOOC refinery in the southern province of Guangdong caught fire Monday but there were no casualties, the company said, adding that the cause of the blaze was still under investigation.

The refinery is located about 25 miles from the Daya Bay nuclear power plant, according to the official Xinhua news agency.

Copyright Agence France-Presse, 2011

Subscribe to ShahidulNews

The regular weekly “Solidarity for Limon” rally had been steadily attracting bigger crowds, despite the monsoon rains. The gathering this Friday the 24th June 2011 was especially large. The street plays were popular and since this was not an event aligned to either of the main political parties, it attracted ordinary people who came to express solidarity, or merely to enjoy the performance.

This week’s performance, a drama called Khekshial (Jackal), performed by Aranyak Natyadal in front of the National Museum at around 4:30pm, was however disrupted when two men burst through the surrounding crowd and began wrecking the props.

Attack visible from 8 mins 58 secs onwards.

The audience, intially slow to react, as they thought it was part of the play, soon went after the men, but they disappeared into the crowd. Later a young man called Al-Amin was caught by the crowd and accused of being one of the attackers. The man was taken away by Shahbag police, who arrived sometime after the event. The police are reported to have released Al-Amin as he was an innocent by-stander.

Subscribe to ShahidulNews

by rahnuma ahmed

In the end, treachery will betray even itself.

Roman proverb

When the prime minister, the finance minister etc., not known for being democratically-oriented, feel obliged to respond publicly according to the terms and conditions set by the National Oil-Gas Committee, it is clear that the tide is shifting.

It is clear that  the National Committee to Protect Oil, Gas, Mineral Resources, Power and Ports (NCPOGMR) has made a significant impact on public consciousness. That there is a growing national awareness of the issue of ownership of natural resources; of the terms on which production sharing contracts are signed with international oil companies (IOCs); a growing suspicion that exporting extracted gas may not be the best way of solving the nation’s energy shortfall. More precisely, of the hollowness of the government’s reasoning as to why gas blocks need to be, must necessarily be, leased out to multinational companies.  More broadly, of whether the nation’s ruling class, regardless of which political party is in power, does act in the interests of the nation, of its people.

It is clear from what top ruling party leaders are now obliged to say, to repeatedly say, we are patriotic, we are not treacherous, that they have been forced to cede ground.

It is clear that a moral battle has been won.

Two days after the deal was signed with energy giant ConocoPhillips on June 16, 2011 for deep sea exploration in the Bay of Bengal, prime minister Sheikh Hasina was forced to say, we are not doing anything which goes against the interests of the nation, against the interests of the people. She was echoing what her cabinet colleagues and energy officials had said earlier. The finance minister had affirmed at the signing ceremony, the government has protected the country’s interest.   Petrobangla’s chairman Hossain Monsur too, had said, the production sharing contract contains nothing which goes against the national interest. Similar words had been mouthed by the prime minister’s energy advisor Tawfiq-e-Elahi Chowdhury.

No one is a better patriot, no one is a better protector of the nation’s interests than me, said the prime minister (Who is a better patriot, asks PM, bdnews24, June 18, 2011).

News reports indicate, she then went off into a rant. Where was the National Oil-Gas committee during the previous government when there was no development in the country? When there was no electricity production? When there was no gas exploration? When investors were kept waiting due to lack of gas and electricity?

Leaders and activists of the National Committee were exactly where they are now. They had demanded then, as they demand now, that energy policies should benefit the people, not the multinational companies. That it is detrimental to the national interest.

But I wonder whether the prime minister remembers where she herself had been when there was `no development in the country, when there was no electricity production…’ etc. etc. When the people of Phulbari had risen up against Asia Energy’s proposed open-pit mine. When an elderly woman had said, “No, we do not want the coal mine. What will we eat?” When a young man had asked, `Two coal mines have been built in neighbouring areas. What development has it brought, tell me?’ When paramilitary forces had opened fire on August 26, 2006. Three persons killed. Many more injured (`You cannot eat coal.’ Resistance in Phulbari, New Age, August 19, 2008).

Sheikh Hasina, then leader of the opposition, had visited Phulbari. She had publicly pledged to resist any move to start open-pit mining in Phulbari, or at any other place in the country.  She had lent support to the hartal called by the National Committee on August 30, 2006; had publicly called upon the government led by Khaleda Zia, to stick to the agreement it had entered into with the people of Phulbari.

It is a pledge that has been betrayed since the government, by all indications, is moving ahead to implement an open-pit pilot project at Barapukuria, with top-ranking government leaders desperately trying to shore up support for open-pit mining.  The very leaders who earlier opposed it, now insist, open-pit mining will yield higher economic benefits.

Is it a wonder then that the National Committee accuses the government of betraying the people? Of betraying themselves? Their own words, their own actions? That it accuses them of treachery?

The chorus of voices to be seen and heard now, had been noticeably absent when cables from US embassy Dhaka, WikiLeaked on 24 December night, revealed that US ambassador James Moriarty had met the prime minister’s energy advisor, Tawfiq-e-Elahi Chowdhury, had sought assurances that US-based Conoco Phillips (from among 7 bidders) be awarded two of the uncontested blocks in the Bay of Bengal.

New Age had contacted foreign minister Dipu Moni, and the energy adviser Chowdhury. It had sought official responses on the disclosure. They had avoided questions; a day later, they stopped receiving calls. They did not responded to text messages either (WikiLeaks Bangladesh-1, New Age, December 27, 2010).

Till date, this government, which won a landslide victory in the December 2008 elections, has not responded to the WikiLeaks disclosure.

Instead, top-ranking government leaders keep mouthing words, no, the contracts are not against the national interest. We would never do such a thing, would we?

How can one tell if the contracts are not made publicly available? All contracts signed thus far for coal and natural gas, have been kept secret. They have not been placed before the parliament—the people’s elected body—either.  There has been no parliamentary discussion. To top it all, these contracts have been kept secret from the parliamentary standing committee on energy as well.

Is it not reasonable to want to read the contracts, especially in the light of WikiLeaks disclosure which served only to confirm, and very definitively so, what the National Committee had suspected all along?

But instead, whenever specific criticisms of the terms of the contract are raised, for instance, that the leasing company has been awarded the right to sell off 80% of the gas extracted, that they are likely to do so given our own experiences and that of other third world countries, that this will not solve the country’s energy crisis, or, that the multinationals will sell it to us at very high prices, that gas prices will double from earlier prices, $2.92, or 210 taka for a million cubic foot to $5-6 or 420 taka,  that this will push up the prices of daily necessities and services further (rice, lentils etc., to transport), that we can see through the government’s excuses, that just because India and Myanmar are going ahead with exploration in their own offshore territory, does not mean that unless we sign over blocks to MNCs we will lose control of that which indisputably belongs to Bangladesh, that we should instead pursue a different path to development, by retaining control over our natural resources, by strengthening the nation’s exploration agencies, that we should stop moaning, `we have neither the money nor the technology’ that it is the political will that matters….

I could go on and on, but I won’t. I’ll stick to the issue of contract instead. All reasonable concerns raised are either dismissed by the Petrobangla chairman, by high officials at the energy ministry as being merely `speculative.’ Or, they are pooh-poohed by our garrulent finance minister, it is `utter nonsense.’  But I have noticed that some of these high officials slip up in their enthusiastic defence, this wont-happen, no, that wont-hapen either, where does it say in the contract?

But exactly. Where is the contract? Why has the government not made any contract available publicly? Why are they secreted away? The only document that we, members of the public, have access to, is the production sharing contract (PSC model 2008), which Anu Muhammad, member secretary, National Committee, is quick to point out, was designed during the caretaker government and was uploaded on the net to facilitate international bidding. Not to elicit comments or suggestions from members of the public. Does secrecy over contracts not lend credence to B D Rahmatullah’s accusation that the power crisis has been manufactured, has been `artificially created’ to push through anti-people power projects like rental power plants? There is reason to take his word for it, he was former director-general of the Power Cell. `Our engineers,’ he says, `are willing to sell their country just for a ticket abroad’ (Budhbar, August 18, 2010).

Did the Awami League sign a muchleka with foreign powers that if voted to power, our natural resources would be handed over?

As the issue of caretaker government rages between the two major political parties, which government will hold the next parliamentary elections, will it be the current one, or a caretaker government, as rumors fly around of the dice being stacked so that Hossain Mohd Ershad and his Jatiya Party, currently a member of the ruling alliance, can form the loyal opposition, as it increasingly seems that the war crimes trials are being drawn-out to help win another election, as Ershad gets acquitted in a money-laundering case filed over 15 years ago (as I write),  suspicions keep deepening.

Suspicions which led the National Committee to organise a seige of the energy ministry—dubbed Kashimbazjar Kuthi—on June 14, 2011, to protest against the government’s decision to sign the deal with ConocoPhillips.  Police action prevented the seige from taking place, protestors were clubbed, many were hurt and injured.

Mir Jafar, who swore by the Holy Quran to fight the English, bowing before Robert Clive after the Battle of Plassey, 1757, which inaugurated 200 years of British colonial rule and exploitation in India. Artist Francis Hayman, 1757

Our rulers have not learned any lessons from history. Despite Mir Jafar being one of the most despised and reviled names, despite his having been unable to `benefit’ in the narrow sense of the word from his act of treachery.

The demoted army chief of Nawab Sirajuddoula, the last independent Nawab of Bengal, entered into a secret pact with the British, negotiated by William Watts, chief of the British factory at Kasimbazar. In exchange of promises of huge bribes and the Nawabship of Bengal, Mir Jafar withheld his troops when Sirajuddoula fought with the British East India Company’s army on June 23, 1757. Despite being numerically superior, the nawab’s forces lost; forced to flee, Sirajuddoula was later caught and executed

Later day historians agree that although the purported reason given for the Battle of Plassey was Sirajuddoula’s capture of Fort William in Kolkata, the Company had actually decided that only a change of regime would help it advance its interests. That the East India Company’s geo-political ambition and the larger dynamics of colonial conquest are essential to understanding the larger picture. For, the conquest of Bengal, Bihar and Orissa had led to further conquests. Of India. Of South Asia.

And what of geo-political ambitions now? Critical commentators agree that the the US-led `war on terror’ is actually a war for energy resources. That America’s foreign oil dependency is being militarised by the US government, that it has chosen to rely on military forces to protect access to foreign oil. And that, as other players (China, Russia) enter the stage, the US administration is turning to seek other energy sources.

But to return to history, what happened to Mir Jafar? Installed as the Nawab, he was a mere puppet figure. He was un-installed when he realised that British expectations were boundless, but was re-installed after Mir Qasim proved to be too strong-minded. Another quisling, Jagat Seth, hereditary banker to the Mughal Emperor and the Nawab of Bengal, reportedly went mad after Clive refused to give him 5% of the loot promised.

To return to the present, close to Mir Jafar’s palace in Murshidabad, in ruins, stands a gate known as Nimak Haramer Deori (the traitor’s gate).

Published in New Age, Monday, June 20, 2011 http://newagebd.com/newspaper1/editorial/23090.html

Coal Climate Showdown in Bangladesh