The growing divide between Tel-Aviv and Washington dangles hope for Middle East Peace
Earlier this month the Palestinians reluctantly agreed to US-mediated indirect talks with Israel but the planned negotiation collapsed two days later when Israel announced plans to build 1600 new settler homes in east Jerusalem during a visit by US Vice-president Joe Biden. This illegal announcement angered not only Biden and Hillary Clinton but also the US president Barack Obama himself. The whole world salutes Obama for his present stance against the Israeli policy. The peace loving people of the entire globe now observes the whole situation with much anxiousness and with keen interest how US is going to deal with the affair ultimately. It is true that America’s tough stance against Israel‘s expansion theory and state anarchy will definitely be cornered. The Palestinians have said Israelis construction of settlement is the main obstacle to reaching a peace deal because it is carving off parts of their promised state. Netanyahu imposed a ten-month halt on new construction in the West Bank in November, but the move was rejected by the Palestinians because it did not include east Jerusalem, public buildings and projects already under way. The murder of a Palestinian politician in Dubai recently was committed by Israel. The recent expulsion of an Israeli diplomat in London by the British government over a forgery of British passports that would camouflage the killers is a broad hint of the levels to which Israel has stooped in defense of its questionable national interest. The White House’s tit for tat policy when Netanyahu went to meet Obama clearly indicates US really wants real peace in the Middle East. The recent incidents clandestinely retain many messages for Israel.
Netanyahu returned from Washington on March 26 after a tense visit that appeared to deepen a bitter row with the administration of president Barack Obama over the bundling of Jewish settlements in annexed Arab east Jerusalem.” The Prime Minster’s position is that there is no change in Israel’s policy on Jerusalem that has been pursued by all governments of Israel for the last 42 years. Defense Secretary Robert Gates was even at pains to renew administration warnings that Israel- Palestinian tensions harm US security interest in the Middle East. The lack of progress to wear Middle East peace is clearly an issue that is exploited by our adversaries in the region. Gates said adding it does affect US national security interests in the region. The US appears in no mood to blink first in its tense showdown with Israel after reportedly handing prime minster Benjamin Netanyahu a blueprint to kick start moribund peace talks, Israeli Prime Minister Bejamin Netanyahu put on a brace face as he flew home to a storm of derision on March 26 having failed to resolve a bitter row with Washington over settlement holding. He insisted ahead of his departure that the two close allies had made progress but his trip served to illustrate the growing divide between Israel and Washington on Jewish settlement activity. Despite meeting with US president Barck Obama and other top officials, Netanyahu appeared unable to tamp down the row over the construction of 1600 new settler home in annexed Arab east Jerusalem .
A senior minister warned that Israel would ‘liquidate’ the Islamist Hamas-run government in Gaza following deadly weekend clashed that killed two Israeli soldiers. “Sooner or later we will liquidate the military regime of the pro-Iranian Hamas which control the Gaza Strip. Finance minister Yuvai Steintz , from the governing rightwing Likud party told public radio. He continued “I am not setting a timetable but we will not tolerate this regime continuing to strengthen itself military and providing itself with an arsenal of rockets that threaten our territory.” Palestinian president Mahmud Abbas on March 27 ruled out holding even indirect talks with Israel unless it freezes settlement construction in the West Bank including mostly Arab east Jerusalem. “We cannot resume indirect negotiation as long as Israel maintains its settlement policy and the status quo.”-he said. All these indicate that the black cloud is gathering in the sky once again. Israel still seems to be firm in its illegal decision and hopes to receive backing from its so long closest allies. But the world hopes not to see Middle East peace shattered any more by the questionable steps of Israel.
Israel captured east Jerusalem during the 1967 war and annexed it shortly after in a move not recognized by the international community. The Palestinians want east Jerusalem as the capital of their future state. The long standing crisis in this region must come to an end and USA will take stern and legal steps for establishing sustainable peace in the region is the hope of all.
Md. Masum Billah
Program Manger : brac Education Program, PACE
10th floor, brac Head Office, 75, Mohakhali, Dhaka 1212.
Cell: 01714-091431, 9355253(home)
Email: mmbillah2000@yahoo.com
Thursday, September 30, 2010
Sunday, September 26, 2010
Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize for his promise, not for his performance
Barak Obama won the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize that honoured the first-year U.S. president more for promise than achievement and drew both praise and skepticism around the globe. Describing himself as surprised and deeply humbled , Obama said he would accept the award as a call to action’ to confront the global challenges of the 21st century. Obama created a new international politics. only very rarely has a person to the same extent as Obama captured the worlds attention and given its people hope for a better future . The Norwegian Nobel Committee praised Obama for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples’ citing his fledgling push for nuclear disarmament and his outreach to the Muslim world. Obama, took office as the first black US President in January, has been widely credited with improving America’s global image after the eight-year presidency of George W. Bush, who alienated both friends and foes with go-it-alone politics like the 2003 US led invasion of Iraq.
Iranian foreign minister Manouchehr Mottaki called the Nobel decision ‘ hasty’. The appropriate time for awarding such a prize is when foreign military forces leave Iraq and Afghanistan and when one stands by the rights of the oppressed Palestinian people. “We are in need of actions, not sayings”’ Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh said. He continued ,” If there is no fundamental and true change in American policies toward the acknowledgement of the rights of the Palestinian people, I think this prize won’t move us forward or backward.”
In Nobel tradition, nominations are kept secret since its inception, unless those making the submission go public about their picks. This year’s nominations included Colombian activist Piedad Cordoba, Afghan woman’s rights activist Simi Samar and Denis Mukwege, a physician in war-torn Congo who opened a clinic to help rape victims. Nominators for the prize are broad and include former laureates, current and former members of the committee and their staff, members of national governments and legislatures, university professors of law, theology, social sciences, history and philosophy, leaders of peace research and foreign affairs institutes and members of international courts of law. But critics called the Nobel Committee’s this year’s decision premature , given that Obama has achieved few tangible gains as he grapples with challenges ranging from the War in Afghanistan and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict to nuclear standoffs with Iran and North Korea. He won the award on the same day he was convening his war counsel to weigh whether to send thousands more troops to Afghanistan to turn the tide against a resurgent Taliban.
His troubles at home include a battered economy and a fierce debate over healthcare reform that have chipped away at his once –lofty approval ratings and a Republican opposition that has moved well past the honeymoon phase. When Mohter Teresa of Calcutta received the award in 1979 as Catholic org points out she stated in her reception speech “I feel the greatest destroyer of peace today is abortion, because it is a direct war , a direct killing- direct murder by the mother herself. Because if a mother can kill her own child, what is left for me to kill you and you kill me-there is nothing between.” Obama has denied repeatedly that his reform would fund abortion but as Fact Check org. stated in August, as for the House bill as it stands now, it’s a matter of fact that it would allow both a public plan an newly subsidized private plans to cover all. Critics continue saying that awarding Piece prize to Obama is an insult to the memory of former award winners like the Reverend Martin Luther King, Jody Williams, Nelson Mandela, Aung San Suu Kyi, Dalai Lama, Lech Walesa and others who put their lives and careers on the line to struggle for peace and human dignity to give this award to a man who has accomplished so little and who in fact in his short term in office has managed to expand one war, to block the international condemnation of the brutality of another and who has done nothing to reverse his own country’s leading role as a promoter of war and international violence.
Under Obama Guantanamo’s terrorist prison is still in operation and is holding people whom even the government admits are guilty of nothing. Under him the US has also blocked the Goldstone Report which condemns Israel of war crimes in its recent assault on Gaza.a nd. Under Obama the US military in Afghanistan has continued to slaughter disproportionate numbers of civilians through its wanton use of aerial bombardment, pilotless Predator drowns and antipersonnel weaponry. His administration continues to refuse to sign the international anti-landmine treaty. And under Obama, the US continues its role as not only the leading producer and exporter of arms, but also as the major initiator of wars in the world. Under Obama the US continues to outspend the rest of the world’s nations combined on its military. He continues threatening Iran though not in the same tone as Bush did. So critics around the world continue to say that it is a travesty. They again say that It is not as much of a travesty as when Henry Kissinger , a war criminal of the first order who as an architect of the latter stages of the Indochina War and was personally responsible for the slaughter of well over a million innocent people, won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1973 while that war was still raging but the awarding of the latest Noebl peace Prize to Obama is travesty enough. Henry Kissinger, the US Secretary of state, along with the North Vietnamese negotiator, Le Duc Tho, won this prize even when the war was going on . the Nobel committee, choice for peace prize has been criticized before when Anwar Sadat and Menachem Begin won it in 1978, compared to those controversial recipients one must say that Obama is far better a choice , as he has visibly made some efforts towards peace building in some parts of the world
Obama’s early pronouncement to close Guantanamo, to bring the troops home from Iraq, to want a nuclear weapon-free world, to deliver great speech to the Islamic world in Cairo to eliminate the useless term ‘ The War on Terror’ and put an end to torture-have all made us and the rest of the world feel a bit more safe considering the disaster of the past eight years. In eight months he has done and taken his country in a much more sane direction. The Taliban is a different matter and it’s a problem for the people of Afghanistan to resolve-just as America did in 1776, the French did in 1789, the Cubans did in 1959, the Nicaraguans did in 1979 and the people of the East Berlin id in 1989. One thing is certain though all revolutions by people who wish to be free –they ultimately have to bring about that freedom themselves. The outside force cannot really make it happen which Barack Obama must understand.
It is true that Obama has not yet achieved anything substantive towards peace. But in Europe and much of the world, Obama is praised for bringing the US closer to mainstream global thinking on such issues as climate change and multilateralism. A 25-nation poll of 27000 people released in July by the Pew Global Attitudes Project found double digit boosts to the percentage of people viewing the US favorably in countries around the world. That indicator had plunged across the world under President George Bush. The award appeared to be at least party a slap at Bush from a committee that harshly criticized Obama’s predecessor for his largely unilateral military action in the wake of the September 11 terror attack.
And Obama at least has changed the tone America uses to speak to the world generally and the Muslim world specially. His speech in Cairo, his first week interview on al-Arabiya and the extraordinary conciliatory holiday video he sent to Iran are all substantial illustrations of his intention to lead the troubled world to peace process. His willingness to sit down and negotiate with Iran rather than threaten and berate like Bush has already produced tangible results. He has at least preliminarily broken from Bush’s full-scale subservience to Israelis to cease settlement activities even though it subjected him to the sorts of domestic political risks and vicious smears that have made prior president s afraid to do so. His decision to use his first full day in office to issue executive orders to close Guantanamo, ostensibly ban torture and bar CIA black sites was an important symbol offered to the world. He refused to reflexively support the right-wing, civil-liberty crushing coup leaders in Honduras, merely because they were pro-American and anti-Chavez, this siding with the vast bulk of Latin American’s governments –a move George Bush, or John AcCain , never would have made. Thus foreign affairs is one area where he has shown genuine potential for some constructive changes and has on occasion, merited real praise for taking steps in the general peace direction which this prize is meant to honour. The peace prize was awarded to encourage ongoing peace efforts. Let Obama be a true man of peace
Md. Masum Billah
Senior Manager: BRAC Education Programme, PACE
( He writes regularly on various national and international issues)
Phone: 9355253 (home), 01714-091431(cell)
Email: mmbillah2000@yahoo.com
Barak Obama won the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize that honoured the first-year U.S. president more for promise than achievement and drew both praise and skepticism around the globe. Describing himself as surprised and deeply humbled , Obama said he would accept the award as a call to action’ to confront the global challenges of the 21st century. Obama created a new international politics. only very rarely has a person to the same extent as Obama captured the worlds attention and given its people hope for a better future . The Norwegian Nobel Committee praised Obama for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples’ citing his fledgling push for nuclear disarmament and his outreach to the Muslim world. Obama, took office as the first black US President in January, has been widely credited with improving America’s global image after the eight-year presidency of George W. Bush, who alienated both friends and foes with go-it-alone politics like the 2003 US led invasion of Iraq.
Iranian foreign minister Manouchehr Mottaki called the Nobel decision ‘ hasty’. The appropriate time for awarding such a prize is when foreign military forces leave Iraq and Afghanistan and when one stands by the rights of the oppressed Palestinian people. “We are in need of actions, not sayings”’ Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh said. He continued ,” If there is no fundamental and true change in American policies toward the acknowledgement of the rights of the Palestinian people, I think this prize won’t move us forward or backward.”
In Nobel tradition, nominations are kept secret since its inception, unless those making the submission go public about their picks. This year’s nominations included Colombian activist Piedad Cordoba, Afghan woman’s rights activist Simi Samar and Denis Mukwege, a physician in war-torn Congo who opened a clinic to help rape victims. Nominators for the prize are broad and include former laureates, current and former members of the committee and their staff, members of national governments and legislatures, university professors of law, theology, social sciences, history and philosophy, leaders of peace research and foreign affairs institutes and members of international courts of law. But critics called the Nobel Committee’s this year’s decision premature , given that Obama has achieved few tangible gains as he grapples with challenges ranging from the War in Afghanistan and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict to nuclear standoffs with Iran and North Korea. He won the award on the same day he was convening his war counsel to weigh whether to send thousands more troops to Afghanistan to turn the tide against a resurgent Taliban.
His troubles at home include a battered economy and a fierce debate over healthcare reform that have chipped away at his once –lofty approval ratings and a Republican opposition that has moved well past the honeymoon phase. When Mohter Teresa of Calcutta received the award in 1979 as Catholic org points out she stated in her reception speech “I feel the greatest destroyer of peace today is abortion, because it is a direct war , a direct killing- direct murder by the mother herself. Because if a mother can kill her own child, what is left for me to kill you and you kill me-there is nothing between.” Obama has denied repeatedly that his reform would fund abortion but as Fact Check org. stated in August, as for the House bill as it stands now, it’s a matter of fact that it would allow both a public plan an newly subsidized private plans to cover all. Critics continue saying that awarding Piece prize to Obama is an insult to the memory of former award winners like the Reverend Martin Luther King, Jody Williams, Nelson Mandela, Aung San Suu Kyi, Dalai Lama, Lech Walesa and others who put their lives and careers on the line to struggle for peace and human dignity to give this award to a man who has accomplished so little and who in fact in his short term in office has managed to expand one war, to block the international condemnation of the brutality of another and who has done nothing to reverse his own country’s leading role as a promoter of war and international violence.
Under Obama Guantanamo’s terrorist prison is still in operation and is holding people whom even the government admits are guilty of nothing. Under him the US has also blocked the Goldstone Report which condemns Israel of war crimes in its recent assault on Gaza.a nd. Under Obama the US military in Afghanistan has continued to slaughter disproportionate numbers of civilians through its wanton use of aerial bombardment, pilotless Predator drowns and antipersonnel weaponry. His administration continues to refuse to sign the international anti-landmine treaty. And under Obama, the US continues its role as not only the leading producer and exporter of arms, but also as the major initiator of wars in the world. Under Obama the US continues to outspend the rest of the world’s nations combined on its military. He continues threatening Iran though not in the same tone as Bush did. So critics around the world continue to say that it is a travesty. They again say that It is not as much of a travesty as when Henry Kissinger , a war criminal of the first order who as an architect of the latter stages of the Indochina War and was personally responsible for the slaughter of well over a million innocent people, won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1973 while that war was still raging but the awarding of the latest Noebl peace Prize to Obama is travesty enough. Henry Kissinger, the US Secretary of state, along with the North Vietnamese negotiator, Le Duc Tho, won this prize even when the war was going on . the Nobel committee, choice for peace prize has been criticized before when Anwar Sadat and Menachem Begin won it in 1978, compared to those controversial recipients one must say that Obama is far better a choice , as he has visibly made some efforts towards peace building in some parts of the world
Obama’s early pronouncement to close Guantanamo, to bring the troops home from Iraq, to want a nuclear weapon-free world, to deliver great speech to the Islamic world in Cairo to eliminate the useless term ‘ The War on Terror’ and put an end to torture-have all made us and the rest of the world feel a bit more safe considering the disaster of the past eight years. In eight months he has done and taken his country in a much more sane direction. The Taliban is a different matter and it’s a problem for the people of Afghanistan to resolve-just as America did in 1776, the French did in 1789, the Cubans did in 1959, the Nicaraguans did in 1979 and the people of the East Berlin id in 1989. One thing is certain though all revolutions by people who wish to be free –they ultimately have to bring about that freedom themselves. The outside force cannot really make it happen which Barack Obama must understand.
It is true that Obama has not yet achieved anything substantive towards peace. But in Europe and much of the world, Obama is praised for bringing the US closer to mainstream global thinking on such issues as climate change and multilateralism. A 25-nation poll of 27000 people released in July by the Pew Global Attitudes Project found double digit boosts to the percentage of people viewing the US favorably in countries around the world. That indicator had plunged across the world under President George Bush. The award appeared to be at least party a slap at Bush from a committee that harshly criticized Obama’s predecessor for his largely unilateral military action in the wake of the September 11 terror attack.
And Obama at least has changed the tone America uses to speak to the world generally and the Muslim world specially. His speech in Cairo, his first week interview on al-Arabiya and the extraordinary conciliatory holiday video he sent to Iran are all substantial illustrations of his intention to lead the troubled world to peace process. His willingness to sit down and negotiate with Iran rather than threaten and berate like Bush has already produced tangible results. He has at least preliminarily broken from Bush’s full-scale subservience to Israelis to cease settlement activities even though it subjected him to the sorts of domestic political risks and vicious smears that have made prior president s afraid to do so. His decision to use his first full day in office to issue executive orders to close Guantanamo, ostensibly ban torture and bar CIA black sites was an important symbol offered to the world. He refused to reflexively support the right-wing, civil-liberty crushing coup leaders in Honduras, merely because they were pro-American and anti-Chavez, this siding with the vast bulk of Latin American’s governments –a move George Bush, or John AcCain , never would have made. Thus foreign affairs is one area where he has shown genuine potential for some constructive changes and has on occasion, merited real praise for taking steps in the general peace direction which this prize is meant to honour. The peace prize was awarded to encourage ongoing peace efforts. Let Obama be a true man of peace
Md. Masum Billah
Senior Manager: BRAC Education Programme, PACE
( He writes regularly on various national and international issues)
Phone: 9355253 (home), 01714-091431(cell)
Email: mmbillah2000@yahoo.com
The Nuclear Summit 2010
Will the Nuclear Summit 2010 get the World rid of Nuclear Weapons?
Having succeeded in bringing radical change in the age-old healthcare system at home, President Barack Obama has caste his glance at the international issues. The stated reason of this 47 -nation summit is to keep nuclear arms out of the hands of terrorists. But there is a second equally important reason to convince powerful states like China to impose a new round of sanctions on Iran, which is believed to be working towards producing nuclear arms. Nine countries in the world possess nuclear weapons and thirty eight other countries store or produce enriched uranium and plutonium . The magnitude of their nuclear storage is enough to make more than 100000 nuclear bombs. It is reported that there have been 18 classes of weapons grade uranium theft since 1993. Authorities in this issue point the finger at Russia, the former Soviet republic s and Pakistan. Many important heads of states participated in the summit but North Korea and Iran were not welcome where the envisaged preventative action is pretty much against them. Israel Prime is supposed to think that he would not be able to give the satisfactory answers regarding the nuclear stance of his country. Peaceful world leaders want Israel to get rid of its nuclear arsenal. If it is not done, Iran will not stand away from it.
Singing historic Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty with the Russian Federation on April 08, 2010 in Prague president Obama opened up relations with the Russian Federation which signals the turning point on foreign policy of Oabam administration. Holding summit of 47 heads of states and government from April 12-13, on nuclear security President has made significant progress towards achieving a nuclear free world and ambitions program. This summit is the first of its kind and no president has ever hold such summit on nuclear security since talks on reduction of nuclear arms that begun in 1970s. this was the biggest ever gathering of the heads of states and governments conveyed by Obama administration since the establishment of the united Nations in 1945. The summit on nuclear security was the continuation of historic Security Council summit hosted by President Obama on September 24, 2009 in the United Nations. Apart form five permanent members ten rotating non-permanent members of the council except Gaddafi of Libya attended the summit. It adopted unanimous resolution 1887 which committed to the goal of a world without nuclear weapons and to ensure nuclear safety and security. The nations participating in the Washington summit agreed to swap information to prevent illegal nuclear materials trafficking and supported the implementation of strong nuclear security practices.
The initiate bore some concrete fruits. Several states have agreed to surrender their nuclear materials For example, Mr Viktor Yanukovich, the Ukrinina president declared that his nation would get rid of its inventory of highly enriched uranium. Present Obama expressed pleasure with this decision because it would greatly help international efforts to keep these materials out of the hands terrorists. But Russian president Dmitry Medvedev in an interview with Russian national daily Izvestia described the nuclear security summit hosted by Barack Obama in Washington as the ‘most unarguable. The issues that united us were so obvious -nuclear terrorism cooperation in countering countries that are trying to obtain technologies by illegal means. Obama’s invitation brought together an impressive declaration that his nation would get rid groups of world leaders that concerns the common future of mankind.
The participating nations ‘ welcomed and joined president Obama’s call to secure all vulnerable nuclear material in four years as they work together to enhance nuclear security. We must take into account that the world possesses so much nuclear arms and weapons but still about half of human beings go to bed without having anything. Thousands and lakhs of children die without treatment in Asian, African and Latin American countries. Unemployment, drug addiction, women trafficking, corruption, child labour, child soldiers slap the so classed present civilization of the globe. The environmental hazards have engulfed the entire globe threatening our existence on this planet. In this critical juncture we cannot afford to show nuclear race. Who will keep these racing nations away from their wring paths? Only Obama cannot afford to do so. But he has at least initiated showing a difference of his predecessors. He deserves global thanks.
France, China, Britain , Israel , India and Pakistan are known to have nuclear weapons while the United States and Russia hold 90 percent of the world’ nuclease arsenals. Incidentally Israel, India and Pakistan did not sign Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty till today but they participated in the summit. We have reason to have doubt about the secure future of using nuclear materials. Review of the progress or failure of this summit would be determined in the second summit to be held in Seoul, South Korea in 2012. Let us see how much successful it will be.
Md. Masum Billah
Senior Manager: Brac Education Programme, PACE
Brac Head Office, 75, Mohakhali, Dhaka 1212.
Phone : 9355253 (res)< 01714-091431(cell)
Email: mmbillah2000@yahoo.com
Having succeeded in bringing radical change in the age-old healthcare system at home, President Barack Obama has caste his glance at the international issues. The stated reason of this 47 -nation summit is to keep nuclear arms out of the hands of terrorists. But there is a second equally important reason to convince powerful states like China to impose a new round of sanctions on Iran, which is believed to be working towards producing nuclear arms. Nine countries in the world possess nuclear weapons and thirty eight other countries store or produce enriched uranium and plutonium . The magnitude of their nuclear storage is enough to make more than 100000 nuclear bombs. It is reported that there have been 18 classes of weapons grade uranium theft since 1993. Authorities in this issue point the finger at Russia, the former Soviet republic s and Pakistan. Many important heads of states participated in the summit but North Korea and Iran were not welcome where the envisaged preventative action is pretty much against them. Israel Prime is supposed to think that he would not be able to give the satisfactory answers regarding the nuclear stance of his country. Peaceful world leaders want Israel to get rid of its nuclear arsenal. If it is not done, Iran will not stand away from it.
Singing historic Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty with the Russian Federation on April 08, 2010 in Prague president Obama opened up relations with the Russian Federation which signals the turning point on foreign policy of Oabam administration. Holding summit of 47 heads of states and government from April 12-13, on nuclear security President has made significant progress towards achieving a nuclear free world and ambitions program. This summit is the first of its kind and no president has ever hold such summit on nuclear security since talks on reduction of nuclear arms that begun in 1970s. this was the biggest ever gathering of the heads of states and governments conveyed by Obama administration since the establishment of the united Nations in 1945. The summit on nuclear security was the continuation of historic Security Council summit hosted by President Obama on September 24, 2009 in the United Nations. Apart form five permanent members ten rotating non-permanent members of the council except Gaddafi of Libya attended the summit. It adopted unanimous resolution 1887 which committed to the goal of a world without nuclear weapons and to ensure nuclear safety and security. The nations participating in the Washington summit agreed to swap information to prevent illegal nuclear materials trafficking and supported the implementation of strong nuclear security practices.
The initiate bore some concrete fruits. Several states have agreed to surrender their nuclear materials For example, Mr Viktor Yanukovich, the Ukrinina president declared that his nation would get rid of its inventory of highly enriched uranium. Present Obama expressed pleasure with this decision because it would greatly help international efforts to keep these materials out of the hands terrorists. But Russian president Dmitry Medvedev in an interview with Russian national daily Izvestia described the nuclear security summit hosted by Barack Obama in Washington as the ‘most unarguable. The issues that united us were so obvious -nuclear terrorism cooperation in countering countries that are trying to obtain technologies by illegal means. Obama’s invitation brought together an impressive declaration that his nation would get rid groups of world leaders that concerns the common future of mankind.
The participating nations ‘ welcomed and joined president Obama’s call to secure all vulnerable nuclear material in four years as they work together to enhance nuclear security. We must take into account that the world possesses so much nuclear arms and weapons but still about half of human beings go to bed without having anything. Thousands and lakhs of children die without treatment in Asian, African and Latin American countries. Unemployment, drug addiction, women trafficking, corruption, child labour, child soldiers slap the so classed present civilization of the globe. The environmental hazards have engulfed the entire globe threatening our existence on this planet. In this critical juncture we cannot afford to show nuclear race. Who will keep these racing nations away from their wring paths? Only Obama cannot afford to do so. But he has at least initiated showing a difference of his predecessors. He deserves global thanks.
France, China, Britain , Israel , India and Pakistan are known to have nuclear weapons while the United States and Russia hold 90 percent of the world’ nuclease arsenals. Incidentally Israel, India and Pakistan did not sign Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty till today but they participated in the summit. We have reason to have doubt about the secure future of using nuclear materials. Review of the progress or failure of this summit would be determined in the second summit to be held in Seoul, South Korea in 2012. Let us see how much successful it will be.
Md. Masum Billah
Senior Manager: Brac Education Programme, PACE
Brac Head Office, 75, Mohakhali, Dhaka 1212.
Phone : 9355253 (res)< 01714-091431(cell)
Email: mmbillah2000@yahoo.com
NRO beneficiaries in Pakistan
Suspense among the NRO beneficiaries in Pakistan
The declaration of all the benefits given under the amnesty-National Reconciliation Ordnance –cases withdrawn, acquittals made-are declared void by Pakistan Supreme Court has thrown the whole Pakistan into a spell of struggle of power between judiciary and government and also between civilian government and military establishment. Of course, president Zaradari was not surprised at the rulings as he was anticipating this turn of events. He showed clear reluctance to reinstate the Supreme Court Judges sacked by president Parvez Musharraf under emergency rule in November 2007 because he knew that the NRO would be challenged at the supreme Court and there was possibility that it would be struck down by the court led by chief justice Chaudhury. But other political parties under the leadership of Nawaz Sharif the whole country raised protest and clamored for reinstating Iftekhar Muhammad Chaudhury as the Chief Justice of Pakistan. Zardari government had to give in to the will of Pakistani people. However, his anticipation has come true most recently. It is good in one sense that the governance of law is supposed to be established in Pakistan and the corrupt people should be away from politics. But the time for Pakistan is already very crucial because of the fighting in the country with the Talibans. The Talibans, Pak military and US military and air attack have brought a boggling situation in Pakistan. Now is the time to overcome the situation through united efforts i.e. all political parties must reach a consensus regarding the Taliban issue and ties with the US. In this juncture, anther blow will force Pakistan into frenzy. Analysts apprehend that Pakistan will see Martial law again. But Prime Minister rules out the possibility of it. They say it is for the first time that the PPP has better ties with the army. The army stands by the government and there is contact with the chief of Army General who maintains that the military will not indulge in the country’s politics.
The Pakistan Supreme Court declared that a 2007 National Reconciliation Ordinance which contained the amnesty was unconstitutional and stuck it down, paving the way for thousand of criminal cases to be revived. In fact, what numerous politicians have failed to understand is the need to put life into the ministry of defense, to build its capacity and civilianize its power or decision-making structure. Since the defense ministry is the only institutional cushion between the political government and the military, its capacity is critical. Politicians in Pakistan fall prey to their insecurity regarding lack of time and miss the point. Now the president can think about extending the deadline for repeating the 17the Amendment to be able to play a role in the extension or appointment of the army chief. That’s his last but temporary lifeline. He could buy some time by giving a cold shoulder to the US but these are temporary mechanisms.
Asma Jahangir , Chairman , Pakistan Human Rights Commission said, the Supreme Court bench comprising 17 judges had announced a big decision which created suspense among the NRO beneficiaries as well as masses as it had not given any right for appeal against the decision. There are some commentators who believe that this represents the strengthening of the system and democracy, that the Supreme Court verdict is a warning for presumption, overly ambitious and corrupt politicians. The decision certainly is a milestone but what does it mean for the overall learning process of the various stakeholders in the country’s power politics? And will it influence the future of Pakistan’s politics? These are two big questions now .No wonder Asif Ali Zardari cooperated in the NRO case and did not really try to hold back information. After all, there are others who were part of the NRO as well, including the MQM. Though the NRO pertained to cases of financial corruption, military dictator Pervez Musharraf had also included the NRO criminal cases that did not technically belong there. It will now be interesting to see if the Supreme Court actually takes the matter to its ultimate conclusions by also questioning those who pushed forward the NRO. Surely, it will take Musharraf and those of his close aides who had cobbled this questionable law together to task. Since the highest court has jumped into the fray of supporting state institutions before they crumble forever, the task should be completed.
“Article 248 of the Constitution (presidential immunity) be declared ultra virus as it is in infringement of the fundamental rights of citizens guaranteed in chapter I of part II of the Constitution, the norms of natural justice as promulgated in Quran and Sunnah, said the petition moved by Khalid Kahwaja, chairman of the Defense of Human Rights Organization. Senior lawyer Naseer Ahmed Chaudhury said that Clause 3 of Article 248 prevented courts from issuing any order for the arrest or imprisonment of the president or the governor during their time in office.Kahlid Khawja who will appear in person to plead his case, contended in his petition that Article 248 in its entirety was against the condition and the norms of Islam that guaranteed equality, dignity and respect for humankind. The protection is also not in consonance with Article 25(equality of citizens) which guarantees equal protection of law to all citizens. It means that the president and the governor are free to commit any crime or rob the public treasury and could even commit high treason, but they would not be answerable to any court or forum during the term of committing crimes like former president Pervez Musharaf. The nation, the petition said was divided on this issue as many people, including members of parliament, were agitating against this protection which should not be available to dignitaries. The Islamic concepts as envisaged by the objective resolution under Article 2-A of the Constitution should prevail to ensure a just political system and an Islamic welfare state.
One cannot undermine the significance of public perception. It is equally important for people to have faith in a judgment system is vital and calls for accountability of all other state institutions as well to strengthen the perception that the decision on the NRO was in good faith and to strengthen the rule of law. The decision does coincide with the growing anger of the security establishment against the civilian government for becoming ‘too big for its boots.
The civil and military tension denotes a third critical attempt by the political class to curtail the military’s power. The first attempt was made by Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, who inherited a relatively weak army and had ample scope to reduce its relative power. He partly tried to do it through building institutional mechanism such as the Joint Chiefs of Staff committee and the defense ministry and putting all service chiefs under the supermen command of the prime minster. However, he did not put spirit into his reforms an ended up strengthening the military. Nawas Sharif was the second leader to have a similar opportunity. Political analysts and politicians hoped that he could make headway because he belonged to the most powerful ethnic group and had managed to infiltrate the higher rungs of the officer cadre. Probably the reason that the army viewed Nawas Sharif with suspicion was due to his ability to partially and temporarily. The appointment of General Ziauddin Butt as the new army chief replacing General Mussarraf appeared to be accepted by a number of senior army officers. However, Sharif missed the chance because of his final rash moves. Very recently, Asif Zardari also thought of undercutting the phenomenal power of the military by convicting the United States to support the civilian set-up versus the military move. The army was seen in a bad light due to a decade of Musharraf’s rule and people were talking about strengthening political institutions and decreasing the power of the armed forces. But president Zardari seems to have fallen victim to his lack of understanding of the military, its institutional dynamics and the importance of creating internal partnerships and institutional protective barriers to achieve this objective. For instance, he did not realize that the same civil society that protested against the military would stand up to defend the ISI and oppose provisions in the Kerry Lugar bill to defend the military.
Now there are many and hopefully civil society is amongst them who wish to see the matter carried to its desired end-or to as much as an end as possible in country whose policy is riddled with corruption of a supreme order. This decision of the highest court of the land may possibly go someway to start a cleansing of the political system . Corruption is always and everywhere part of politics, but Pakistan has carried it to a height not so often witnessed in this odd world. The Times of London says “Corruption is widespread among Pakistan’s political leaders but the alleged scale of Mr. Zardari’s activities shocked seasoned observers. The president has been accused of accumulating assets worth $1.5 billion around the world through illegal means. “Although Zardari has spent years in jail over corruption charges, he alleges the charges were politically motivated and question hang over whether he was ever actually convicted of any crime. The NRO was passed in Oct 2007 by then president Pervez Mushrraf under pressure to hold elections and end about eight years of military rule. Zardari’s Peoples’ Party went on to win elections in 2008 restoring civilian rule, but the NRO expired at the end of last month and the PPP did not have enough support to renew the ordinance in parliament. Talking to media persons for the first time following the apex court’s verdict , which may force him to step down , Zaradri said he respects the judiciary and that his party, the Pakistan People’ Party would also abide by the decision of the court. Now let us see what decision he is going to take and how he honours the highest court order of the country.
Md. Masum Billah
Senior Manager: BRAC Education Programme, PACE
Phone: 9355253 (res), 01714-091431(cell)
Email: mmbillah2000@yahoo.com
The declaration of all the benefits given under the amnesty-National Reconciliation Ordnance –cases withdrawn, acquittals made-are declared void by Pakistan Supreme Court has thrown the whole Pakistan into a spell of struggle of power between judiciary and government and also between civilian government and military establishment. Of course, president Zaradari was not surprised at the rulings as he was anticipating this turn of events. He showed clear reluctance to reinstate the Supreme Court Judges sacked by president Parvez Musharraf under emergency rule in November 2007 because he knew that the NRO would be challenged at the supreme Court and there was possibility that it would be struck down by the court led by chief justice Chaudhury. But other political parties under the leadership of Nawaz Sharif the whole country raised protest and clamored for reinstating Iftekhar Muhammad Chaudhury as the Chief Justice of Pakistan. Zardari government had to give in to the will of Pakistani people. However, his anticipation has come true most recently. It is good in one sense that the governance of law is supposed to be established in Pakistan and the corrupt people should be away from politics. But the time for Pakistan is already very crucial because of the fighting in the country with the Talibans. The Talibans, Pak military and US military and air attack have brought a boggling situation in Pakistan. Now is the time to overcome the situation through united efforts i.e. all political parties must reach a consensus regarding the Taliban issue and ties with the US. In this juncture, anther blow will force Pakistan into frenzy. Analysts apprehend that Pakistan will see Martial law again. But Prime Minister rules out the possibility of it. They say it is for the first time that the PPP has better ties with the army. The army stands by the government and there is contact with the chief of Army General who maintains that the military will not indulge in the country’s politics.
The Pakistan Supreme Court declared that a 2007 National Reconciliation Ordinance which contained the amnesty was unconstitutional and stuck it down, paving the way for thousand of criminal cases to be revived. In fact, what numerous politicians have failed to understand is the need to put life into the ministry of defense, to build its capacity and civilianize its power or decision-making structure. Since the defense ministry is the only institutional cushion between the political government and the military, its capacity is critical. Politicians in Pakistan fall prey to their insecurity regarding lack of time and miss the point. Now the president can think about extending the deadline for repeating the 17the Amendment to be able to play a role in the extension or appointment of the army chief. That’s his last but temporary lifeline. He could buy some time by giving a cold shoulder to the US but these are temporary mechanisms.
Asma Jahangir , Chairman , Pakistan Human Rights Commission said, the Supreme Court bench comprising 17 judges had announced a big decision which created suspense among the NRO beneficiaries as well as masses as it had not given any right for appeal against the decision. There are some commentators who believe that this represents the strengthening of the system and democracy, that the Supreme Court verdict is a warning for presumption, overly ambitious and corrupt politicians. The decision certainly is a milestone but what does it mean for the overall learning process of the various stakeholders in the country’s power politics? And will it influence the future of Pakistan’s politics? These are two big questions now .No wonder Asif Ali Zardari cooperated in the NRO case and did not really try to hold back information. After all, there are others who were part of the NRO as well, including the MQM. Though the NRO pertained to cases of financial corruption, military dictator Pervez Musharraf had also included the NRO criminal cases that did not technically belong there. It will now be interesting to see if the Supreme Court actually takes the matter to its ultimate conclusions by also questioning those who pushed forward the NRO. Surely, it will take Musharraf and those of his close aides who had cobbled this questionable law together to task. Since the highest court has jumped into the fray of supporting state institutions before they crumble forever, the task should be completed.
“Article 248 of the Constitution (presidential immunity) be declared ultra virus as it is in infringement of the fundamental rights of citizens guaranteed in chapter I of part II of the Constitution, the norms of natural justice as promulgated in Quran and Sunnah, said the petition moved by Khalid Kahwaja, chairman of the Defense of Human Rights Organization. Senior lawyer Naseer Ahmed Chaudhury said that Clause 3 of Article 248 prevented courts from issuing any order for the arrest or imprisonment of the president or the governor during their time in office.Kahlid Khawja who will appear in person to plead his case, contended in his petition that Article 248 in its entirety was against the condition and the norms of Islam that guaranteed equality, dignity and respect for humankind. The protection is also not in consonance with Article 25(equality of citizens) which guarantees equal protection of law to all citizens. It means that the president and the governor are free to commit any crime or rob the public treasury and could even commit high treason, but they would not be answerable to any court or forum during the term of committing crimes like former president Pervez Musharaf. The nation, the petition said was divided on this issue as many people, including members of parliament, were agitating against this protection which should not be available to dignitaries. The Islamic concepts as envisaged by the objective resolution under Article 2-A of the Constitution should prevail to ensure a just political system and an Islamic welfare state.
One cannot undermine the significance of public perception. It is equally important for people to have faith in a judgment system is vital and calls for accountability of all other state institutions as well to strengthen the perception that the decision on the NRO was in good faith and to strengthen the rule of law. The decision does coincide with the growing anger of the security establishment against the civilian government for becoming ‘too big for its boots.
The civil and military tension denotes a third critical attempt by the political class to curtail the military’s power. The first attempt was made by Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, who inherited a relatively weak army and had ample scope to reduce its relative power. He partly tried to do it through building institutional mechanism such as the Joint Chiefs of Staff committee and the defense ministry and putting all service chiefs under the supermen command of the prime minster. However, he did not put spirit into his reforms an ended up strengthening the military. Nawas Sharif was the second leader to have a similar opportunity. Political analysts and politicians hoped that he could make headway because he belonged to the most powerful ethnic group and had managed to infiltrate the higher rungs of the officer cadre. Probably the reason that the army viewed Nawas Sharif with suspicion was due to his ability to partially and temporarily. The appointment of General Ziauddin Butt as the new army chief replacing General Mussarraf appeared to be accepted by a number of senior army officers. However, Sharif missed the chance because of his final rash moves. Very recently, Asif Zardari also thought of undercutting the phenomenal power of the military by convicting the United States to support the civilian set-up versus the military move. The army was seen in a bad light due to a decade of Musharraf’s rule and people were talking about strengthening political institutions and decreasing the power of the armed forces. But president Zardari seems to have fallen victim to his lack of understanding of the military, its institutional dynamics and the importance of creating internal partnerships and institutional protective barriers to achieve this objective. For instance, he did not realize that the same civil society that protested against the military would stand up to defend the ISI and oppose provisions in the Kerry Lugar bill to defend the military.
Now there are many and hopefully civil society is amongst them who wish to see the matter carried to its desired end-or to as much as an end as possible in country whose policy is riddled with corruption of a supreme order. This decision of the highest court of the land may possibly go someway to start a cleansing of the political system . Corruption is always and everywhere part of politics, but Pakistan has carried it to a height not so often witnessed in this odd world. The Times of London says “Corruption is widespread among Pakistan’s political leaders but the alleged scale of Mr. Zardari’s activities shocked seasoned observers. The president has been accused of accumulating assets worth $1.5 billion around the world through illegal means. “Although Zardari has spent years in jail over corruption charges, he alleges the charges were politically motivated and question hang over whether he was ever actually convicted of any crime. The NRO was passed in Oct 2007 by then president Pervez Mushrraf under pressure to hold elections and end about eight years of military rule. Zardari’s Peoples’ Party went on to win elections in 2008 restoring civilian rule, but the NRO expired at the end of last month and the PPP did not have enough support to renew the ordinance in parliament. Talking to media persons for the first time following the apex court’s verdict , which may force him to step down , Zaradri said he respects the judiciary and that his party, the Pakistan People’ Party would also abide by the decision of the court. Now let us see what decision he is going to take and how he honours the highest court order of the country.
Md. Masum Billah
Senior Manager: BRAC Education Programme, PACE
Phone: 9355253 (res), 01714-091431(cell)
Email: mmbillah2000@yahoo.com
Nepal escaped civil war through eighth amendment
Nepal escaped civil war through eighth amendment
Nepal’s main party leaders were locked in debates and hot talks on May 28 to try and avert a political crisis with parliament’s term due to expire at midnight leaving the country without a functioning legislature. Leaders of the Nepali Congress, Communist Party of Nepal and the Maoists were in deep, discussions on how to take agreement forward. The Maoists fought a decade-long civil war against the state before agreeing to lay down their arms in a 2006 peace agreement. However, four yeas later many of the terms of that deal remain unfilled. These include the integration of thousands of former Maoist fighters into the regular national army and the disbanding of the party’s armed youht wing, the Young Communist League which rival parties consider an obstacle to lasting peace in Nepal.
Nepal experienced decade long Maoist insurgency which came to an en in November 2006, known as the Comprehensive Peace Agreement leading to general elections on April 2008 and a Constituent Assembly of 601 members was formed. In the election, the extreme –left United Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) secured 229 seats. The centre-stage right Nepali Congress got 115, while the centre-left Communist Party of Nepal (United Marxist –Leninist) obtained 108 seats. Pushpa Kumar Dahal popularly known as ‘ Prachanda’ the Maoist leader, became the prime minster with the support of CPN but he was in power only nine months. He dismissed Army Chief General Rookmangud Katwal for refusing to integrate 20000 ‘indoctrinated Maoist fighters into the regular army. President Yadev overturned Prachanda’s decision which led to constitutional crisis. Prachanda felt disgusted and resigned in May 2009. Madav Kumar Nepal of CPN then became PM with the support of Nepali Congress. The present crisis actually originated since then .
The constituent Assembly was mandated to draft the new constitution with two years of its first session. Those two years came to an end on May 28 but Nepal has yet to get the new constitution. Thus the extension of the CA’s tenure became crucial, without which the country would have slipped into the abyss of constitutional vacuum.Subhas Nembang, speaker of the CA, said that 80% of the new constitutions was ready. And if the CA got an extension the remaining drafting could be completed if the key disputes among the parties were resolved quickly. Thousands of people gathered outside the parliament building in Nepalese capital Kathmandu on May 28 and chanted slogans demanding the resignation of the prime minster and the extension of parliament. Madav Kumar Nepal said he would step down in last- minute deal to secure support of Maoist lawmakers for a bill to extend parliament’s term. Maoist leader Pushpa Kumar Dahal pushed the leaders of the ruling Community Party of Nepal and Nepali Congress to accept his demands for new power sharing government. But the other parties were refusing to buckle resulting in the current deadlock and prompting a call from UN Chief Ban Ki moon for the leaders to work out their differences.
Finally, on May 28 amid unprecedented pressure all the parties agreed at an appropriate time and the House passed the 8th Amendment to the Interim Constitution (580 votes to 5 votes) extending the tenure of the CA by one year. The Maoist agreed to the deal because they realized that if the CA was dissolved without producing a constitution, their clout in Nepali constitutional politics would end. They also realized that they cannot afford to go back to arms struggle like before after winning 40% seats in the CA through ballot. Integration of Maoist fighters into the regular army, returning of the land seized during the insurgency to actual farmers, and allowing the law enforcement agencies to proceed against Maoist cadres who are accused of crimes against humanity remain greater challenges for the Maoists. However, the Nepalese has heaved a sigh of relief as the eighth amendment has saved them from being embroiled in civil war.
Md. Masum Billah
Senior Manager: BRAC Education Programme, PACE
Phone: 9355253(home), 01714-091431(cell)
Email: mmbillah2000@yahoo.com
Nepal’s main party leaders were locked in debates and hot talks on May 28 to try and avert a political crisis with parliament’s term due to expire at midnight leaving the country without a functioning legislature. Leaders of the Nepali Congress, Communist Party of Nepal and the Maoists were in deep, discussions on how to take agreement forward. The Maoists fought a decade-long civil war against the state before agreeing to lay down their arms in a 2006 peace agreement. However, four yeas later many of the terms of that deal remain unfilled. These include the integration of thousands of former Maoist fighters into the regular national army and the disbanding of the party’s armed youht wing, the Young Communist League which rival parties consider an obstacle to lasting peace in Nepal.
Nepal experienced decade long Maoist insurgency which came to an en in November 2006, known as the Comprehensive Peace Agreement leading to general elections on April 2008 and a Constituent Assembly of 601 members was formed. In the election, the extreme –left United Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) secured 229 seats. The centre-stage right Nepali Congress got 115, while the centre-left Communist Party of Nepal (United Marxist –Leninist) obtained 108 seats. Pushpa Kumar Dahal popularly known as ‘ Prachanda’ the Maoist leader, became the prime minster with the support of CPN but he was in power only nine months. He dismissed Army Chief General Rookmangud Katwal for refusing to integrate 20000 ‘indoctrinated Maoist fighters into the regular army. President Yadev overturned Prachanda’s decision which led to constitutional crisis. Prachanda felt disgusted and resigned in May 2009. Madav Kumar Nepal of CPN then became PM with the support of Nepali Congress. The present crisis actually originated since then .
The constituent Assembly was mandated to draft the new constitution with two years of its first session. Those two years came to an end on May 28 but Nepal has yet to get the new constitution. Thus the extension of the CA’s tenure became crucial, without which the country would have slipped into the abyss of constitutional vacuum.Subhas Nembang, speaker of the CA, said that 80% of the new constitutions was ready. And if the CA got an extension the remaining drafting could be completed if the key disputes among the parties were resolved quickly. Thousands of people gathered outside the parliament building in Nepalese capital Kathmandu on May 28 and chanted slogans demanding the resignation of the prime minster and the extension of parliament. Madav Kumar Nepal said he would step down in last- minute deal to secure support of Maoist lawmakers for a bill to extend parliament’s term. Maoist leader Pushpa Kumar Dahal pushed the leaders of the ruling Community Party of Nepal and Nepali Congress to accept his demands for new power sharing government. But the other parties were refusing to buckle resulting in the current deadlock and prompting a call from UN Chief Ban Ki moon for the leaders to work out their differences.
Finally, on May 28 amid unprecedented pressure all the parties agreed at an appropriate time and the House passed the 8th Amendment to the Interim Constitution (580 votes to 5 votes) extending the tenure of the CA by one year. The Maoist agreed to the deal because they realized that if the CA was dissolved without producing a constitution, their clout in Nepali constitutional politics would end. They also realized that they cannot afford to go back to arms struggle like before after winning 40% seats in the CA through ballot. Integration of Maoist fighters into the regular army, returning of the land seized during the insurgency to actual farmers, and allowing the law enforcement agencies to proceed against Maoist cadres who are accused of crimes against humanity remain greater challenges for the Maoists. However, the Nepalese has heaved a sigh of relief as the eighth amendment has saved them from being embroiled in civil war.
Md. Masum Billah
Senior Manager: BRAC Education Programme, PACE
Phone: 9355253(home), 01714-091431(cell)
Email: mmbillah2000@yahoo.com
Saturday, September 25, 2010
Myanmar Bangladesh Relations
Myanmar Bangladesh Relations
Of recent several bitter incidents and apprehensions took place between the Bangladesh-Myanmar borders putting Bangladesh into diplomatic concern. The Myanmar army turned up in Mongu and Alitanjo to evict ethnic Muslim Rohingyas from their ancestral homeland. They forcibly acquired around 1000 acres of arable land and distributed it among the Buddhist citizens of Mongdu town. The authority has also told the Rohingyas to go to the hills or to take refuge in Bangladesh. Bangladesh has experienced a small but regular infiltration of Rohingya Muslim refugees from Myanmar in recent months. They speak of terrors being unleashed on them by Myanmar troops as in 1988 with the aims of completely flushing the Arakn clean of Rohingya Muslims who have been living there for centuries and should be treated as full Myanmar citizen like the others. Tensions have arisen particularly over Myanmar’s planned construction of a 40 kilometer fence along the border, ostensibly to check cross-border smuggling. Recently in October 2008 a standoff between Myanmar and Bangladesh occurred when Myanmar not only permitted a South Korean ship to explore natural gas in the disputed vessel. Claims and counterclaims of the two neighbors in the Bay of Bengal continue to occur regularly.
What Myanmar could not accomplish in the sea because of the relative weakness of its navy, it may seek to compensate on the rough through its army that outnumbers Bangladesh by nearly three to one. Reportedly, Myanmar is building a new naval cum military base at a place called Mutek facing the Bay of Bengal and very near Bangladesh. Heavy military arsenals have been also mobilized. The preparations are certainly not of a defensive type but smack of aggressive intensions. It could well be that Rangoon would set the stage for a direct clash on the land borders to avenge their humiliation on the sea. During the 1980s when Myanmar was the largest opium producer in the world, the basic goal behind Myanmar Bangladesh bilateral relationship was to cooperate in anti-drugs cooperation. But over the years, the relationship started facing a lot of complications with the emergence of issues like maritime border demarcation, Rohingya refugees and drug trafficking.
Diplomatic relations between any two countries are based on their national interests. And if such two countries in question happen to be neigbours , then the issues in question become more sensitive. But there is no reason that the existing problems should overshadow the further growth in the relation between the two countries. The building of 25-kilometre long road within Myanmar by Bangladesh, about which the Myanmar government has reportedly shown fresh interest, is certainly a development worth nothing. The prospect of further extension of the road through Myanmar territory up to the Chinese border, if materialized in the mutual interest of the three countries will contribute immensely towards taking the existing level of relation and cooperation among the three countries to a newer heights.
Bangladesh has a population that is more than three times the population of Myanmar. The contrast becomes sharper seeing that rich in natural resources with 16 percent cent of its land area under cultivation and 52 percent of its land covered with forest, let alone the mineral resources lying below the surface of the earth. Bangladesh enjoys certain advantages over Myanmar in terms of expertise in different fields with that she may draw on to a lower cost compared to other developed and developing countries. But the more important argument in favour of such cooperation at an enhanced level is that the two peoples have a long history of close cultural relation and exchange. The political will of the two governments would play here the key role in maintaining the pace of further growth of trade and commerce between Bangladesh and Myanmar.
As far as economic aspect of Myanmar-Bangladesh relationship is concerned , the signing of the border trade agreement of May 1994 legalizing the informal border trade between the two states, the inauguration of Teknaf-Maungdaw trade in September 1995, Bangladesh trade delegations’ visit to Myanmar in 1998, Sr. Gen. Than Shawe’s visit to Bangladesh in December 2002 and consequent agreement between the parties to cooperate in road and water transportation , can be pointed out as significant developments. However, on strategic issues, a lot remains to be done. The very fact that Myanmar-Bangladesh border offers a safe haven to terrorist organizations in the region makes it necessary for both countries to cooperate in counter insurgency activities. The refugee problem in Myanmar is another significant aspect which needs to be addressed adequately by both Myanmar and Bangladesh. According to a recent estimate even today around 19200 remain in Bangladesh. Smuggling of arms and ammunitions is considered another area in which both countries need to cooperate. Despite lack of cooperation on certain strategic issues, both Myanmar and Bangladesh have been trying to improve bilateral ties through certain regional and sub-regional forums such as the Bay of Bengal initiatives for Multi-sectoral Technical and Economic Cooperation the ARF, the Bangladesh China India Myanmar Forum.
The Myanmar government’s renewed interest in the tri-nation network has breathed new life into the prospect of a wider window of relations with its Southwest Asian neighbor. The earlier proposed idea of building a 25-kilometre road link between the two countries was a leap forward towards developing a stronger bond of relationship between the two neighbors. But some past as well as recently arising developments like the disputes over maritime boundary between the two reighbours in the Bay of Bengal that led to a brief face- of over exploration of gas, the building of border fence by Myanmar along the common border between the two countries without consulting with Bangladesh, the fresh influx of Myanmar minority Muslims into Bangladesh due to their alleged persecution by the authorities there stand in the way of good neighbourly relationship. It is quite interesting to note that the case of Myanmar-Bangladesh relations, the demographic factor plays quite a different role. Over the years while flow of refugees from Bangladesh has been a source of trouble for its neighbors, in case of its relation with Myanmar, Bangladesh is the affected party. The burden of refugees seems to be particularly high in case of Bangladesh due to its poor economic condition and limited resource. In addition, there are constant assessments that some of the refugees may be associated with terror groups.
For India, both Bangladesh and Myanmar have their own special significance from geopolitical as well as strategic points of view. On the Indian side terrorism prone states like Arunachal, Nagaland, Manipur and Mizoram share border with Myanmar. The problem of insurgency and economic underdevelopment in this region cannot be addressed adequately without India’s cooperation with Myanmar on these issues. Indo- Myanmar relationship is also significant due to India’s emphasis on Look East Policy. Growing Myanmar China relations may affect India’s improving our relations with Myanmar.
Bangladesh needs to take extra caution and subtle diplomatic policy as some international political analysts say that Myanmar cannot be trusted with sensible pacific intensions. If it were otherwise, then it would not push into Bangladesh as many as 3000000 Muslims of Myanmar origin from it Arakan state in 1988 after inflicting tortures on them in a manner not much different from the ethnic cleansing of the Muslims in Bosnia by the Serbs. They attribute to the fact that Myanmar is no democracy or a pluralistic society where clamour for human rights, adherence to international norms and standards have any chance of a patient observance. It is one of the few Stalinist type bastions of totalitarian governance in the world today. Ruled by a bunch of xenophobic generals whose instincts are further faced by ugly racialism? Myanmar today is pariah state in the international sense. But the country has the largest military in south east Asia and the fanaticism of its leaders to be guided by no reason in dealing with outsiders. And these dealing make it dangerous for any neigbouring country to be tangled in bitter confrontation with it. But the highest stress on Bangladesh’s part to counter Myanmar‘s aggressiveness should be put on diplomacy. China has the greatest influence on Myanmar at present. China also is a friend of Bangladesh. Bangladesh must use its China card to restrain the generals in Rangoon from indulging in any misadventure against it. It should also seek to apply all other forms of international pressure on Myanmar to rethink its aggressive plans against Bangladesh. But everything should be done in peaceful, ingenious and subtle ways. The renowned nineteenth century American columnist and orator Wendel l Phillips said, ”Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty”. Bangladesh must understand its meaning .
Md. Masum Billah
Senior Manager: BRAC Education Programme, PACE
Phone: 9355253 (res), 01714-091431(cell)
Email: mmbillah2000@yahoo.com
Bangladesh has every reason to be extremely wary about this hostile posture on the pa
Of recent several bitter incidents and apprehensions took place between the Bangladesh-Myanmar borders putting Bangladesh into diplomatic concern. The Myanmar army turned up in Mongu and Alitanjo to evict ethnic Muslim Rohingyas from their ancestral homeland. They forcibly acquired around 1000 acres of arable land and distributed it among the Buddhist citizens of Mongdu town. The authority has also told the Rohingyas to go to the hills or to take refuge in Bangladesh. Bangladesh has experienced a small but regular infiltration of Rohingya Muslim refugees from Myanmar in recent months. They speak of terrors being unleashed on them by Myanmar troops as in 1988 with the aims of completely flushing the Arakn clean of Rohingya Muslims who have been living there for centuries and should be treated as full Myanmar citizen like the others. Tensions have arisen particularly over Myanmar’s planned construction of a 40 kilometer fence along the border, ostensibly to check cross-border smuggling. Recently in October 2008 a standoff between Myanmar and Bangladesh occurred when Myanmar not only permitted a South Korean ship to explore natural gas in the disputed vessel. Claims and counterclaims of the two neighbors in the Bay of Bengal continue to occur regularly.
What Myanmar could not accomplish in the sea because of the relative weakness of its navy, it may seek to compensate on the rough through its army that outnumbers Bangladesh by nearly three to one. Reportedly, Myanmar is building a new naval cum military base at a place called Mutek facing the Bay of Bengal and very near Bangladesh. Heavy military arsenals have been also mobilized. The preparations are certainly not of a defensive type but smack of aggressive intensions. It could well be that Rangoon would set the stage for a direct clash on the land borders to avenge their humiliation on the sea. During the 1980s when Myanmar was the largest opium producer in the world, the basic goal behind Myanmar Bangladesh bilateral relationship was to cooperate in anti-drugs cooperation. But over the years, the relationship started facing a lot of complications with the emergence of issues like maritime border demarcation, Rohingya refugees and drug trafficking.
Diplomatic relations between any two countries are based on their national interests. And if such two countries in question happen to be neigbours , then the issues in question become more sensitive. But there is no reason that the existing problems should overshadow the further growth in the relation between the two countries. The building of 25-kilometre long road within Myanmar by Bangladesh, about which the Myanmar government has reportedly shown fresh interest, is certainly a development worth nothing. The prospect of further extension of the road through Myanmar territory up to the Chinese border, if materialized in the mutual interest of the three countries will contribute immensely towards taking the existing level of relation and cooperation among the three countries to a newer heights.
Bangladesh has a population that is more than three times the population of Myanmar. The contrast becomes sharper seeing that rich in natural resources with 16 percent cent of its land area under cultivation and 52 percent of its land covered with forest, let alone the mineral resources lying below the surface of the earth. Bangladesh enjoys certain advantages over Myanmar in terms of expertise in different fields with that she may draw on to a lower cost compared to other developed and developing countries. But the more important argument in favour of such cooperation at an enhanced level is that the two peoples have a long history of close cultural relation and exchange. The political will of the two governments would play here the key role in maintaining the pace of further growth of trade and commerce between Bangladesh and Myanmar.
As far as economic aspect of Myanmar-Bangladesh relationship is concerned , the signing of the border trade agreement of May 1994 legalizing the informal border trade between the two states, the inauguration of Teknaf-Maungdaw trade in September 1995, Bangladesh trade delegations’ visit to Myanmar in 1998, Sr. Gen. Than Shawe’s visit to Bangladesh in December 2002 and consequent agreement between the parties to cooperate in road and water transportation , can be pointed out as significant developments. However, on strategic issues, a lot remains to be done. The very fact that Myanmar-Bangladesh border offers a safe haven to terrorist organizations in the region makes it necessary for both countries to cooperate in counter insurgency activities. The refugee problem in Myanmar is another significant aspect which needs to be addressed adequately by both Myanmar and Bangladesh. According to a recent estimate even today around 19200 remain in Bangladesh. Smuggling of arms and ammunitions is considered another area in which both countries need to cooperate. Despite lack of cooperation on certain strategic issues, both Myanmar and Bangladesh have been trying to improve bilateral ties through certain regional and sub-regional forums such as the Bay of Bengal initiatives for Multi-sectoral Technical and Economic Cooperation the ARF, the Bangladesh China India Myanmar Forum.
The Myanmar government’s renewed interest in the tri-nation network has breathed new life into the prospect of a wider window of relations with its Southwest Asian neighbor. The earlier proposed idea of building a 25-kilometre road link between the two countries was a leap forward towards developing a stronger bond of relationship between the two neighbors. But some past as well as recently arising developments like the disputes over maritime boundary between the two reighbours in the Bay of Bengal that led to a brief face- of over exploration of gas, the building of border fence by Myanmar along the common border between the two countries without consulting with Bangladesh, the fresh influx of Myanmar minority Muslims into Bangladesh due to their alleged persecution by the authorities there stand in the way of good neighbourly relationship. It is quite interesting to note that the case of Myanmar-Bangladesh relations, the demographic factor plays quite a different role. Over the years while flow of refugees from Bangladesh has been a source of trouble for its neighbors, in case of its relation with Myanmar, Bangladesh is the affected party. The burden of refugees seems to be particularly high in case of Bangladesh due to its poor economic condition and limited resource. In addition, there are constant assessments that some of the refugees may be associated with terror groups.
For India, both Bangladesh and Myanmar have their own special significance from geopolitical as well as strategic points of view. On the Indian side terrorism prone states like Arunachal, Nagaland, Manipur and Mizoram share border with Myanmar. The problem of insurgency and economic underdevelopment in this region cannot be addressed adequately without India’s cooperation with Myanmar on these issues. Indo- Myanmar relationship is also significant due to India’s emphasis on Look East Policy. Growing Myanmar China relations may affect India’s improving our relations with Myanmar.
Bangladesh needs to take extra caution and subtle diplomatic policy as some international political analysts say that Myanmar cannot be trusted with sensible pacific intensions. If it were otherwise, then it would not push into Bangladesh as many as 3000000 Muslims of Myanmar origin from it Arakan state in 1988 after inflicting tortures on them in a manner not much different from the ethnic cleansing of the Muslims in Bosnia by the Serbs. They attribute to the fact that Myanmar is no democracy or a pluralistic society where clamour for human rights, adherence to international norms and standards have any chance of a patient observance. It is one of the few Stalinist type bastions of totalitarian governance in the world today. Ruled by a bunch of xenophobic generals whose instincts are further faced by ugly racialism? Myanmar today is pariah state in the international sense. But the country has the largest military in south east Asia and the fanaticism of its leaders to be guided by no reason in dealing with outsiders. And these dealing make it dangerous for any neigbouring country to be tangled in bitter confrontation with it. But the highest stress on Bangladesh’s part to counter Myanmar‘s aggressiveness should be put on diplomacy. China has the greatest influence on Myanmar at present. China also is a friend of Bangladesh. Bangladesh must use its China card to restrain the generals in Rangoon from indulging in any misadventure against it. It should also seek to apply all other forms of international pressure on Myanmar to rethink its aggressive plans against Bangladesh. But everything should be done in peaceful, ingenious and subtle ways. The renowned nineteenth century American columnist and orator Wendel l Phillips said, ”Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty”. Bangladesh must understand its meaning .
Md. Masum Billah
Senior Manager: BRAC Education Programme, PACE
Phone: 9355253 (res), 01714-091431(cell)
Email: mmbillah2000@yahoo.com
Bangladesh has every reason to be extremely wary about this hostile posture on the pa
May Day and the Workers of Bangladesh
May Day and the Workers of Bangladesh
Every year May Day is observed in our country with some known ceremonies, promises, meetings and seminars. The oldest history of the Day is just reminded and discussed. The day ends and the promise disappear gradually. The woes of our workers remain as their constant companion. Our jute industries witnessed the rich chunk of labourers which now sees a moribund state and many industries have died totally. Garment sector has emerged with promising aspect. Hence, the workers of this sector become the focal point of May Day.
Job opportunities for women in Bangladesh are limited because of cultural barriers and limited mobility. They also lack access to education, skill development opportunities and productive resources, aside from bearing the burden of household responsibilities. With the expansion of the ready-made garment industry in the 1980s, jobs were created for poor Bangladeshi women. About 90%of the estimated 1.8million workers in the 3500 garment factories in Bangladesh are women. Bangladesh presently exports ready-made garments to about 30 countries around the world. The smiling of these workers will make Bangladesh smile. It’s a plain truth. But what we see? The crying of these workers, unrest in this sector and the rift between the workers and owners has thrown this vibrant economic sector into a threatening situation.
It is true that financial constraint grabs both the owners and the workers. So, there should be a reasonable negotiation between these two entities. A good management can ensure it. In absence of these phenomena garment industries see turmoil, catching fire, sudden closure and what not. There are labour laws and factory laws but mostly in theory not much in practice. Only the government or only the owners cannot ensure it. Two sided sincere initiatives can bring calmness here.
In the rainy season or hot summer days or even in the period of natural calamities the garment workers reach their working places walking four or five kilometers. They must reach there by 8:00 am. Six or often seven days a week they are to work. The workers get soaked in the heavy downpours between June and October and suffer from fever and other diseases. Many cannot afford two sets of clothes to change after getting soaked. The situation gets worse at night because of the fear of being raped. The big garment workers or their association may arrange cheap rated transport for picking up and making them get down at some particular spots. In almost all the garment factories very unhygienic toilets diffuse very obnoxious smell. It discourages women workers to drink necessary amount of water to avoid visiting toilets incurring serious physical as well as mental ills. Primary medical care must be arranged for the workers who are the backbone of this industry. Taking these small steps can win the heart of the garment workers and even without big salaries they will digest the small problems. Nothing of this kind is ensured and untoward incidents are just followed by meetings and suggestions.
Another side of the coin is also grim. Our agricultural sector faces serious labour scarcity. During the harvesting seasons, labourers become scare and thus a huge amount of crops are wasted because they cannot be brought home in time. Labourers pay becomes abnormally high crossing the harvesting cost. To minimize this situation more harvesting machineries need to be developed and imported. Our jute industries need to be revived. The problems of the cotton workers are not heard so intensely. The principal sector occupied by our vibrant labouer class is garments industry. This sector needs meticulous designing and planning in the greater interest of our national economy. Making it practical let us see the better days ahead taking oath on this august day.
The Haymarekt affair is related to this day. The Haymarket affair occurred during the course of a three-day general strike in Chicago, Illonis, United States that involved common laborers, artisans, in which police opened fire and killed four strikers at the MacCormick Harvesting Machine Co. plant. A rally was called for the following day at Haymarket Square. The event remained peaceful, yet towards the end of the rally a police moved in to disperse the event, an unknown assailant threw a bomb into the crowd of police. The bomb and resulting police riot left at least a dozen people died, including seven policemen. A trial followed which hanged another four anarchists. Nowadays this sort of Haymarket event has become almost a daily affair in our garment sector. It started several years back. Even during the time of caretaker government. Now it has turned a dangerous shape. What is its next course is uncertain as no pragmatic solution is addressed yet.
May Day has become an international celebration of the social and economic achievements of the lbaour movement . The Day is called International Worker’s Day or Labour Day as it commemorates the fight for the eight hour day. Still our women workers work for more than eight hours. The labour union can address the woes lying in this filed but labour leaders work like middlemen . They extract benefit both from the owners, governments, donor and also from the deprived labourers. These stories are not new. So, despite many problems garment workers are reluctant to unionize and instead have developed their own coping strategies in this sector. Now the reality is the workers are on the streets, in the market, in the cinemas around the roadside ,tea stalls and in the city transports . Everywhere they are. This regular visibility of the labourers calls for organized labour system. Let us vow to extend economic emancipation and social security for them.
Md. Masum Billah
Senior Manager: Brac Education Programme, PACE
Brac Head Office, 75, Mohakhali, Dhaka 1212
Phone: 9355253(home), 01714-091431(cell)
Email: mmbillah2000@yahoo.com
Every year May Day is observed in our country with some known ceremonies, promises, meetings and seminars. The oldest history of the Day is just reminded and discussed. The day ends and the promise disappear gradually. The woes of our workers remain as their constant companion. Our jute industries witnessed the rich chunk of labourers which now sees a moribund state and many industries have died totally. Garment sector has emerged with promising aspect. Hence, the workers of this sector become the focal point of May Day.
Job opportunities for women in Bangladesh are limited because of cultural barriers and limited mobility. They also lack access to education, skill development opportunities and productive resources, aside from bearing the burden of household responsibilities. With the expansion of the ready-made garment industry in the 1980s, jobs were created for poor Bangladeshi women. About 90%of the estimated 1.8million workers in the 3500 garment factories in Bangladesh are women. Bangladesh presently exports ready-made garments to about 30 countries around the world. The smiling of these workers will make Bangladesh smile. It’s a plain truth. But what we see? The crying of these workers, unrest in this sector and the rift between the workers and owners has thrown this vibrant economic sector into a threatening situation.
It is true that financial constraint grabs both the owners and the workers. So, there should be a reasonable negotiation between these two entities. A good management can ensure it. In absence of these phenomena garment industries see turmoil, catching fire, sudden closure and what not. There are labour laws and factory laws but mostly in theory not much in practice. Only the government or only the owners cannot ensure it. Two sided sincere initiatives can bring calmness here.
In the rainy season or hot summer days or even in the period of natural calamities the garment workers reach their working places walking four or five kilometers. They must reach there by 8:00 am. Six or often seven days a week they are to work. The workers get soaked in the heavy downpours between June and October and suffer from fever and other diseases. Many cannot afford two sets of clothes to change after getting soaked. The situation gets worse at night because of the fear of being raped. The big garment workers or their association may arrange cheap rated transport for picking up and making them get down at some particular spots. In almost all the garment factories very unhygienic toilets diffuse very obnoxious smell. It discourages women workers to drink necessary amount of water to avoid visiting toilets incurring serious physical as well as mental ills. Primary medical care must be arranged for the workers who are the backbone of this industry. Taking these small steps can win the heart of the garment workers and even without big salaries they will digest the small problems. Nothing of this kind is ensured and untoward incidents are just followed by meetings and suggestions.
Another side of the coin is also grim. Our agricultural sector faces serious labour scarcity. During the harvesting seasons, labourers become scare and thus a huge amount of crops are wasted because they cannot be brought home in time. Labourers pay becomes abnormally high crossing the harvesting cost. To minimize this situation more harvesting machineries need to be developed and imported. Our jute industries need to be revived. The problems of the cotton workers are not heard so intensely. The principal sector occupied by our vibrant labouer class is garments industry. This sector needs meticulous designing and planning in the greater interest of our national economy. Making it practical let us see the better days ahead taking oath on this august day.
The Haymarekt affair is related to this day. The Haymarket affair occurred during the course of a three-day general strike in Chicago, Illonis, United States that involved common laborers, artisans, in which police opened fire and killed four strikers at the MacCormick Harvesting Machine Co. plant. A rally was called for the following day at Haymarket Square. The event remained peaceful, yet towards the end of the rally a police moved in to disperse the event, an unknown assailant threw a bomb into the crowd of police. The bomb and resulting police riot left at least a dozen people died, including seven policemen. A trial followed which hanged another four anarchists. Nowadays this sort of Haymarket event has become almost a daily affair in our garment sector. It started several years back. Even during the time of caretaker government. Now it has turned a dangerous shape. What is its next course is uncertain as no pragmatic solution is addressed yet.
May Day has become an international celebration of the social and economic achievements of the lbaour movement . The Day is called International Worker’s Day or Labour Day as it commemorates the fight for the eight hour day. Still our women workers work for more than eight hours. The labour union can address the woes lying in this filed but labour leaders work like middlemen . They extract benefit both from the owners, governments, donor and also from the deprived labourers. These stories are not new. So, despite many problems garment workers are reluctant to unionize and instead have developed their own coping strategies in this sector. Now the reality is the workers are on the streets, in the market, in the cinemas around the roadside ,tea stalls and in the city transports . Everywhere they are. This regular visibility of the labourers calls for organized labour system. Let us vow to extend economic emancipation and social security for them.
Md. Masum Billah
Senior Manager: Brac Education Programme, PACE
Brac Head Office, 75, Mohakhali, Dhaka 1212
Phone: 9355253(home), 01714-091431(cell)
Email: mmbillah2000@yahoo.com
Pakistan faces 9/11 daily
Pakistan faces 9/11 daily
After nine suicide attacks in just 11 days that killed 160 people , Pakistan army has finally started its long awaited offensive in South Waziristan where the Pakistani Taliban are based. Pakistan launched a ground and air operation designed to crush Taliban sanctuaries in the lawless south Washington region which borders Afghanistan on Oct 17 and fears have been growing about the impact on the local population. People trying to get away from fighting are already reporting civilian casualties and food shortages. The approaching winter is only going to a bad situation worse especially for those left behind unless aid reaches them. Around 30000 troops are taking part in the offensive against an estimated ten to twelve thousand militants in the semi- autonomous and lawless tribal belt. Relief workers say more that 200000 people have been displaced by the fighting. The success of the offensive could be critical for the fate of Pakistan which is financially broken and politically paralyzed. The spate of attacks could have been designed to prevent or delay the army offensive but the Talibans aimed to topple the government, impose on Islamic state and if possible get hold of Pakistan’s nuclear weapons. The recent attacks have proved more deadly than those in the past because they took place in there of the country’s four provinces involving not just Taliban tribesmen from the Peshawar ethnic group but extremist Punjab and Kashmir factions.
Pakistan relation with US on whom it depends for cash and weapons to fight Islamist militants bombing the country can be uneasy. But many Pakistanis blame the US-led ‘war on terror’ and government’s alliance with Washington for the attacks sweeping the country’s and US missile attacks on al-Quadea and Taliban-linked extremists have inflamed sensibilities. In the midst of this critical juncture of Pakistan US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton paid a three-day visit to Pakistan and she pledged a 45-million dollar investment for higher education in Pakistan and was to meet business leaders. Her visit is taking place at a time when Pakistan is striving to overcome multiple energy, economic and terrorism challenges. Fending off a question about perceived towards Pakistan’s arch rival India, Hillary told the hand picked audience that peace was the way forward. If there were peace between Pakistan and India and the outstanding issues were resolved, Pakistan would have taken off like a rocket in terms of economic development. Pakistan has such an opportunity to be a power house because of her strategic location.
On her first visit to Pakistan as secretary of State Hillary Clinton on October 28 sought to chip away at anti-Americanism in this predominantly Muslim nation while applauding the government for taking on violent extremist forces. She also said Obama administration intends to do more to support Pakistan on a wide range of issues including economic development, energy generation, education and environment. She told Bush Administration had focused too narrowly on Pakistan’s value as an ally in the war of terrorism, neglecting other aspects of relationship. ‘We are turning the page on what has been for the past several years, primarily a security, anti-terrorist agenda. She arrived in Pakistan’s cultural capital Lahore where she answered critical questions on US policy from Pakistan students, second day of diplomatic mission overshadowed by a massive bomb attack killing 105 people.
Hillary’s visit to the second largest city in Pakistan which has been hit by a series of gun, suicide and grenade attacks this year has been accompanied by draconian security measures. She said, “ In the north-western city left no doubt that Pakistan is in the midst of battle against extremists. This is not your fight alone. You are standing on the frontlines of this battle but we are standing with you.”US wants to turn its pages on its relationship with Pakistan devoting significant energy to public diplomacy to counter rising Pakistan criticism of the alliance with Washington. Hillary already committed 85 million dollars to counting poverty, 125 million dollars for improving Pakistan’ woefully inadequate electricity supply and 104 million dollars to law enforcement and border security assistance. Pakistani officials consider these aids as undermining Pakistan but the White House says that Hillary brings a message of friendship and support to a country undergoing tremendous pressure.
In a series of public appearances on the final day of a three-day visit marked by blunt talk. Hillary refused to discuss the subject which involves highly classified CIA operation. She said only that ‘there is a war going on. And the Obama administration is committed to helping Pakistan defeat the insurgents and terrorists who threaten the stability of a nuclear –armed nation. “ Whatever help she wants to mean you see the common peoples’ comment and reaction. A weeping Saddiq Khan who lost his brother and father says, “My brother and father had nothing to do with Taliban or the army. So why were they killed? We got their bodies back in pieces. It was almost impossible to recognize them.”
More angry people responded to Hillary’s face to face talking with people and students. They say,“ Your presence in the region is not good for peace referring to US military because it gives rise to frustration and irritation among the people of the region.“You had one 9/11 but we are having daily 9/11 in Pakistan. “Hillary of course admitted that the mistakes were done by her country by the previous regime of her country. It is true that the present Taliban is the creation of White House and the military regime of Pakistan but the common people are to bear the brunt of it. How long the 9/11 situation will continue in Pakistan is a question.
Md. Masum Billah
Programme Manager: BRAC Education Programme, PACE
Phone: 9355253(res), 01714-091431(cell)
Email: mmbillah2000@yahoo.com
After nine suicide attacks in just 11 days that killed 160 people , Pakistan army has finally started its long awaited offensive in South Waziristan where the Pakistani Taliban are based. Pakistan launched a ground and air operation designed to crush Taliban sanctuaries in the lawless south Washington region which borders Afghanistan on Oct 17 and fears have been growing about the impact on the local population. People trying to get away from fighting are already reporting civilian casualties and food shortages. The approaching winter is only going to a bad situation worse especially for those left behind unless aid reaches them. Around 30000 troops are taking part in the offensive against an estimated ten to twelve thousand militants in the semi- autonomous and lawless tribal belt. Relief workers say more that 200000 people have been displaced by the fighting. The success of the offensive could be critical for the fate of Pakistan which is financially broken and politically paralyzed. The spate of attacks could have been designed to prevent or delay the army offensive but the Talibans aimed to topple the government, impose on Islamic state and if possible get hold of Pakistan’s nuclear weapons. The recent attacks have proved more deadly than those in the past because they took place in there of the country’s four provinces involving not just Taliban tribesmen from the Peshawar ethnic group but extremist Punjab and Kashmir factions.
Pakistan relation with US on whom it depends for cash and weapons to fight Islamist militants bombing the country can be uneasy. But many Pakistanis blame the US-led ‘war on terror’ and government’s alliance with Washington for the attacks sweeping the country’s and US missile attacks on al-Quadea and Taliban-linked extremists have inflamed sensibilities. In the midst of this critical juncture of Pakistan US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton paid a three-day visit to Pakistan and she pledged a 45-million dollar investment for higher education in Pakistan and was to meet business leaders. Her visit is taking place at a time when Pakistan is striving to overcome multiple energy, economic and terrorism challenges. Fending off a question about perceived towards Pakistan’s arch rival India, Hillary told the hand picked audience that peace was the way forward. If there were peace between Pakistan and India and the outstanding issues were resolved, Pakistan would have taken off like a rocket in terms of economic development. Pakistan has such an opportunity to be a power house because of her strategic location.
On her first visit to Pakistan as secretary of State Hillary Clinton on October 28 sought to chip away at anti-Americanism in this predominantly Muslim nation while applauding the government for taking on violent extremist forces. She also said Obama administration intends to do more to support Pakistan on a wide range of issues including economic development, energy generation, education and environment. She told Bush Administration had focused too narrowly on Pakistan’s value as an ally in the war of terrorism, neglecting other aspects of relationship. ‘We are turning the page on what has been for the past several years, primarily a security, anti-terrorist agenda. She arrived in Pakistan’s cultural capital Lahore where she answered critical questions on US policy from Pakistan students, second day of diplomatic mission overshadowed by a massive bomb attack killing 105 people.
Hillary’s visit to the second largest city in Pakistan which has been hit by a series of gun, suicide and grenade attacks this year has been accompanied by draconian security measures. She said, “ In the north-western city left no doubt that Pakistan is in the midst of battle against extremists. This is not your fight alone. You are standing on the frontlines of this battle but we are standing with you.”US wants to turn its pages on its relationship with Pakistan devoting significant energy to public diplomacy to counter rising Pakistan criticism of the alliance with Washington. Hillary already committed 85 million dollars to counting poverty, 125 million dollars for improving Pakistan’ woefully inadequate electricity supply and 104 million dollars to law enforcement and border security assistance. Pakistani officials consider these aids as undermining Pakistan but the White House says that Hillary brings a message of friendship and support to a country undergoing tremendous pressure.
In a series of public appearances on the final day of a three-day visit marked by blunt talk. Hillary refused to discuss the subject which involves highly classified CIA operation. She said only that ‘there is a war going on. And the Obama administration is committed to helping Pakistan defeat the insurgents and terrorists who threaten the stability of a nuclear –armed nation. “ Whatever help she wants to mean you see the common peoples’ comment and reaction. A weeping Saddiq Khan who lost his brother and father says, “My brother and father had nothing to do with Taliban or the army. So why were they killed? We got their bodies back in pieces. It was almost impossible to recognize them.”
More angry people responded to Hillary’s face to face talking with people and students. They say,“ Your presence in the region is not good for peace referring to US military because it gives rise to frustration and irritation among the people of the region.“You had one 9/11 but we are having daily 9/11 in Pakistan. “Hillary of course admitted that the mistakes were done by her country by the previous regime of her country. It is true that the present Taliban is the creation of White House and the military regime of Pakistan but the common people are to bear the brunt of it. How long the 9/11 situation will continue in Pakistan is a question.
Md. Masum Billah
Programme Manager: BRAC Education Programme, PACE
Phone: 9355253(res), 01714-091431(cell)
Email: mmbillah2000@yahoo.com
Koirala’s passing away marks the end of an era
Koirala’s passing away marks the end of an era in Nepali politics
Former Nepalese Prime Minster Girja Prasad Koirala , the architect of the peace negotiations that ended a decade of Maoist insurgency , succumbed to chronic obstructive pulmonary disease on March 20, 2010 after suffering for nearly a fortnight. In 1991 he became prime minster of the first democratically elected government after a popular revolt that ended absolute rule by the king. Mr. Koirala was president of the Nepali Congress Party and led the mass street demonstration in 2006 that forced then-King Gyannedra to give up his authoritarian rule, reinstate parliament and appoint Mr Kiorala as caretaker prime minster. Soon after that, Koirala’s government stripped Gynendra of all his powers and command of the army. After calling then prime minister Sher Bahadur Deuba incompetent, King Gyanendre Shah sacked him on February 1, 2005 and took direct control of running state affairs. Gynndra had taken over as king following the 2001 royal massacre in which his older brother King Birendra , Queen Aishwayra, Crown Prince Dipendra and Prince Niranjan among other were killed.
First coming to predominance as a union leader in the late 1940s, he has been imprisoned, exiled or detained on numerous occasions for championing the cause of democracy against various autocratic regions. In 1960 he was jailed for eight years for his prodemocracy views. His appointment as Prime minster is not the first time he has been elevated to the country’s leadership after a king’s powers have been curbed. As general secretary of the Nepali Congress Party, he played a key role in public demonstrations in the early 1990s to end the absolute powers of the current king’s brother Birendra.
Koirla spent his entire political life championing the cause of the people. He was a mass leader and a statesman whose knowledge and wisdom guided the polity of Nepal in the right direction at critical junctures in the country’s history. He led the country through some of its biggest upheavals. Koirala was seen as stabilizing force in a country that has seen 18 governments in the last twenty years although like many other politicians in Nepal he faced frequent allegations of corruption. But to many, Koirala’s contribution to national politics and history far outweighed his shortcomings. In 2008 the country voted in a 601-member constituent assembly tasked to write a new constitution. In its first sitting on May 28, 2008, the assembly abolished the 240-year old institution of the monarchy –a key demand of the Maoist party prior to joining peaceful politics. The ruling coalition of 22 political parties led by CPN-UML’s Madhav Kumar Nepal and the main opposition party, the Maoists, are at loggerheads primarily over the issue of power sharing. While the Maoists which are the largest party in the constituent assembly maintain that the incumbent government should resign and pave the way for a national unity government that they lead. The coalition holds the view that it has the numbers to lead the government. The constitution which has to be passed by two-thirds majority in the consistent assembly cannot be promulgated without the Maoists’ support because it holds 40 percent of the seats in the assembly. The Maoists and other major parties are also at odd over a host of other issues ranging from the structure of a federal model to the system of governance to be adopted in the new constitution of Nepal.
Indian Prime Minsiter Dr. Manomohan Singh described Koirala ‘one of the Nepal’s tallest leaders and an elder statesman of South Asia’. Koirala was 86. He was four times prime minister. First from 1991to 1994, 1998 to 1999, 2000 to 2001 and 2006 to 2008. On each occasion his administration fell due to a combination of congress party in fighting and the narrowness of his majorities in parliament. The passing away of Shri Koirala marks the end of an era in Nepalese politics. Koirla had an enlightened vision of Indira-Nepal relations and worked sincerely to bring the people of the two countries closer together. He was recently nominated by the government for the Nobel Peace Prize because he was much more than a party leader. He was a statesman. “He was revered by leaders across all parties” Bishnu Rimal , politburo member of Community party of Nepal( United Marxist-Leninist) said. He had the credibility and the stature to oversee the completion of the peace process and the rafting of the new constitution. He was at the forefront of two successful people’s movement for democracy, in 1990 and the other in 2006. Today with just a little over two months left before the deadline for promulgating a new constitution expires in May, Koirala ‘s ability to bring together leaders from opposite end of the political spectrum will be sorely missed.
Md. Masum Billah
Senior Manager: brac Education Programme, PACE
10th floor, 75, Mohakhali, Dhaka1212.
Cell: 01714-091431, 9355253(home)
Email: mmbillah2000@yahoo.com
Former Nepalese Prime Minster Girja Prasad Koirala , the architect of the peace negotiations that ended a decade of Maoist insurgency , succumbed to chronic obstructive pulmonary disease on March 20, 2010 after suffering for nearly a fortnight. In 1991 he became prime minster of the first democratically elected government after a popular revolt that ended absolute rule by the king. Mr. Koirala was president of the Nepali Congress Party and led the mass street demonstration in 2006 that forced then-King Gyannedra to give up his authoritarian rule, reinstate parliament and appoint Mr Kiorala as caretaker prime minster. Soon after that, Koirala’s government stripped Gynendra of all his powers and command of the army. After calling then prime minister Sher Bahadur Deuba incompetent, King Gyanendre Shah sacked him on February 1, 2005 and took direct control of running state affairs. Gynndra had taken over as king following the 2001 royal massacre in which his older brother King Birendra , Queen Aishwayra, Crown Prince Dipendra and Prince Niranjan among other were killed.
First coming to predominance as a union leader in the late 1940s, he has been imprisoned, exiled or detained on numerous occasions for championing the cause of democracy against various autocratic regions. In 1960 he was jailed for eight years for his prodemocracy views. His appointment as Prime minster is not the first time he has been elevated to the country’s leadership after a king’s powers have been curbed. As general secretary of the Nepali Congress Party, he played a key role in public demonstrations in the early 1990s to end the absolute powers of the current king’s brother Birendra.
Koirla spent his entire political life championing the cause of the people. He was a mass leader and a statesman whose knowledge and wisdom guided the polity of Nepal in the right direction at critical junctures in the country’s history. He led the country through some of its biggest upheavals. Koirala was seen as stabilizing force in a country that has seen 18 governments in the last twenty years although like many other politicians in Nepal he faced frequent allegations of corruption. But to many, Koirala’s contribution to national politics and history far outweighed his shortcomings. In 2008 the country voted in a 601-member constituent assembly tasked to write a new constitution. In its first sitting on May 28, 2008, the assembly abolished the 240-year old institution of the monarchy –a key demand of the Maoist party prior to joining peaceful politics. The ruling coalition of 22 political parties led by CPN-UML’s Madhav Kumar Nepal and the main opposition party, the Maoists, are at loggerheads primarily over the issue of power sharing. While the Maoists which are the largest party in the constituent assembly maintain that the incumbent government should resign and pave the way for a national unity government that they lead. The coalition holds the view that it has the numbers to lead the government. The constitution which has to be passed by two-thirds majority in the consistent assembly cannot be promulgated without the Maoists’ support because it holds 40 percent of the seats in the assembly. The Maoists and other major parties are also at odd over a host of other issues ranging from the structure of a federal model to the system of governance to be adopted in the new constitution of Nepal.
Indian Prime Minsiter Dr. Manomohan Singh described Koirala ‘one of the Nepal’s tallest leaders and an elder statesman of South Asia’. Koirala was 86. He was four times prime minister. First from 1991to 1994, 1998 to 1999, 2000 to 2001 and 2006 to 2008. On each occasion his administration fell due to a combination of congress party in fighting and the narrowness of his majorities in parliament. The passing away of Shri Koirala marks the end of an era in Nepalese politics. Koirla had an enlightened vision of Indira-Nepal relations and worked sincerely to bring the people of the two countries closer together. He was recently nominated by the government for the Nobel Peace Prize because he was much more than a party leader. He was a statesman. “He was revered by leaders across all parties” Bishnu Rimal , politburo member of Community party of Nepal( United Marxist-Leninist) said. He had the credibility and the stature to oversee the completion of the peace process and the rafting of the new constitution. He was at the forefront of two successful people’s movement for democracy, in 1990 and the other in 2006. Today with just a little over two months left before the deadline for promulgating a new constitution expires in May, Koirala ‘s ability to bring together leaders from opposite end of the political spectrum will be sorely missed.
Md. Masum Billah
Senior Manager: brac Education Programme, PACE
10th floor, 75, Mohakhali, Dhaka1212.
Cell: 01714-091431, 9355253(home)
Email: mmbillah2000@yahoo.com
Kyrgistan is plagued with ethnic violence
Kyrgistan is plagued with ethnic violence
Kyrgistan ,the former Soviet republic , has been plagued with ethnic violence for the last several days. Already one hundred and twenty four people have been killed and about twelve hundred injured. The city of Osh has seen street violence in the worst form. Thousands of people have fled the city and hundreds have crossed the border. ‘ curfew has been imposed and the order to’ shoot at sight’ has been declared, still situation is not under the control of the interim government. It has requested Russsia to send armed forces but Russia declined the request on the plea that the present crisis is the internal matter of Kyrgistan. They are not interested in poking their nose in their internal affairs. Of course, they are ready to offer humanitarian aids to the affected people. OIC and the Amnesty International have urged the government to ensure security for minority Uzbeks. Osh homes an air base that forms an important link in the supply line for US and NATO forces in nearby Afghanistan. In Washington, a senior Pentagon official said that ht turmoil has interrupted flights into and out of that facility, and it was unclear when those flights would resume. But the US military has contingency plans to deal with the situation, the official said.
“ We must restore a lot o things that have been wrongly ruled”-said Roza Otunbayeva, who called herself the country’s interim leader. Outunbayva is the head of Kygyztan’s Social Democratic Party and a member of its parliament. She was a leader of the protests that brought Bakiev to power in 2005 and she served as his foreign minister for about two years before quitting protesting his appointment of one of the president’s brothers to an ambassadorship. Opposition leaders have accused Bakiev of consolidating power by keeping key economic and security posts in the hands of relatives or close associates. Protests actually began on June 7in the northern city of Talas, over the increase in electric and fuel rates, which had been jacked up a the first of the year as Bakiev’s government sold the country’s pubic utilities to companies controlled by his friends. These incidents originated early in February when a fight broke out between Kyrgyz and Dungan youth. The Dungans are Muslim of Chinese origin, who moved to Central Asia in the 1870s to escape persecution at home. Many found refuge in Kyrgystan, then part of the Russian empire and there are about 40000 in the country today.Two Dungan youths are alleged to have attacked the pupils. Dungans accounts for 90 percent of the village’s 3000 residents. In the aftermath of the original incident, about 150 Iskra residents gathered to demand that some Dungan families be resettled which then escalated into protesters throwing stones and setting fires to some Dungan houses.
Dungan families have always been better off. Their children, w hen fighting or arguing with their Kyrgyz peers used to tease them that they are mainly poor. Many Kyrgyz work in the fields belonging to Dungan people who are sometimes viewed as outsiders, so this resentment is growing further. Dugans have the new administration is doing to check a growing nationalism In the country that is affecting minorities.After the wave of land grabs that followed the change in power in Kyrgystan in March 2005 local ethnic Turks in Novopavlovka village, found leaflets on their doors that said, “ Down with Turks, go away from our land. We will burn you if you hesitate.” During the power vacuum that followed the ouster of Akayes’v regime many ethnic Russian businesses were targeted by looters. Dungans feel they are under pressure and could face an uncertain future if the new government choose to play the ethnic card to boost support. ‘We have never felt persecuted in Kyrgystan, but that could change and there’s plenty of concern.’-said one Dungan.
The demonstrators spread to the capital on June 7 after the government responded by arresting opposition leaders in Talas. Ethnic clashes in Kyrgystan hijacked the agenda of the annual summit meeting of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization with the SCO leaders vowing to intervene to help stabilize the fellow member-state.Russian president Dmitry Mededev voiced ‘ extreme concern’ over renewed violence in Kyrgystan which is a founding member of the Shanghi group. The interim government of Kyrgystan declared a state of emergency and deployed armored vehicles in the city, but reports form Osh said inter-ethnic clashes resumed in the outskirts of the city with Kyrgyz youths burning Uzbek houses.
Between 1991 and 2002 more than 600000 people emigrated from Kyrgystan and the ethnic minority population declined from 47 to 33 percent. Ethnic clashes have been infrequent but sometimes serious. Fights between Kyrgyz and Uzbeks in the southern cities of Osh and Uzgen on the eve of the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 claimed more than 300 lives. It again starts responding to some irritable points. Let it be cool by the hands of the neighboring and powerful states. The people of Osh and the whole Kyrgistan must restrain themselves and accept the reality that the existence of different caste, creed and religion should live in one territory. Temporary violence, excitement and threatening situation never brings any better results rather it becomes boomerang for all involved.
Md. Masum Billah
Senior Manager: BRAC Education Programme, PACE
Cell: 01714-091431
Email: mmbillah2000@yahoo.com
Kyrgistan ,the former Soviet republic , has been plagued with ethnic violence for the last several days. Already one hundred and twenty four people have been killed and about twelve hundred injured. The city of Osh has seen street violence in the worst form. Thousands of people have fled the city and hundreds have crossed the border. ‘ curfew has been imposed and the order to’ shoot at sight’ has been declared, still situation is not under the control of the interim government. It has requested Russsia to send armed forces but Russia declined the request on the plea that the present crisis is the internal matter of Kyrgistan. They are not interested in poking their nose in their internal affairs. Of course, they are ready to offer humanitarian aids to the affected people. OIC and the Amnesty International have urged the government to ensure security for minority Uzbeks. Osh homes an air base that forms an important link in the supply line for US and NATO forces in nearby Afghanistan. In Washington, a senior Pentagon official said that ht turmoil has interrupted flights into and out of that facility, and it was unclear when those flights would resume. But the US military has contingency plans to deal with the situation, the official said.
“ We must restore a lot o things that have been wrongly ruled”-said Roza Otunbayeva, who called herself the country’s interim leader. Outunbayva is the head of Kygyztan’s Social Democratic Party and a member of its parliament. She was a leader of the protests that brought Bakiev to power in 2005 and she served as his foreign minister for about two years before quitting protesting his appointment of one of the president’s brothers to an ambassadorship. Opposition leaders have accused Bakiev of consolidating power by keeping key economic and security posts in the hands of relatives or close associates. Protests actually began on June 7in the northern city of Talas, over the increase in electric and fuel rates, which had been jacked up a the first of the year as Bakiev’s government sold the country’s pubic utilities to companies controlled by his friends. These incidents originated early in February when a fight broke out between Kyrgyz and Dungan youth. The Dungans are Muslim of Chinese origin, who moved to Central Asia in the 1870s to escape persecution at home. Many found refuge in Kyrgystan, then part of the Russian empire and there are about 40000 in the country today.Two Dungan youths are alleged to have attacked the pupils. Dungans accounts for 90 percent of the village’s 3000 residents. In the aftermath of the original incident, about 150 Iskra residents gathered to demand that some Dungan families be resettled which then escalated into protesters throwing stones and setting fires to some Dungan houses.
Dungan families have always been better off. Their children, w hen fighting or arguing with their Kyrgyz peers used to tease them that they are mainly poor. Many Kyrgyz work in the fields belonging to Dungan people who are sometimes viewed as outsiders, so this resentment is growing further. Dugans have the new administration is doing to check a growing nationalism In the country that is affecting minorities.After the wave of land grabs that followed the change in power in Kyrgystan in March 2005 local ethnic Turks in Novopavlovka village, found leaflets on their doors that said, “ Down with Turks, go away from our land. We will burn you if you hesitate.” During the power vacuum that followed the ouster of Akayes’v regime many ethnic Russian businesses were targeted by looters. Dungans feel they are under pressure and could face an uncertain future if the new government choose to play the ethnic card to boost support. ‘We have never felt persecuted in Kyrgystan, but that could change and there’s plenty of concern.’-said one Dungan.
The demonstrators spread to the capital on June 7 after the government responded by arresting opposition leaders in Talas. Ethnic clashes in Kyrgystan hijacked the agenda of the annual summit meeting of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization with the SCO leaders vowing to intervene to help stabilize the fellow member-state.Russian president Dmitry Mededev voiced ‘ extreme concern’ over renewed violence in Kyrgystan which is a founding member of the Shanghi group. The interim government of Kyrgystan declared a state of emergency and deployed armored vehicles in the city, but reports form Osh said inter-ethnic clashes resumed in the outskirts of the city with Kyrgyz youths burning Uzbek houses.
Between 1991 and 2002 more than 600000 people emigrated from Kyrgystan and the ethnic minority population declined from 47 to 33 percent. Ethnic clashes have been infrequent but sometimes serious. Fights between Kyrgyz and Uzbeks in the southern cities of Osh and Uzgen on the eve of the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 claimed more than 300 lives. It again starts responding to some irritable points. Let it be cool by the hands of the neighboring and powerful states. The people of Osh and the whole Kyrgistan must restrain themselves and accept the reality that the existence of different caste, creed and religion should live in one territory. Temporary violence, excitement and threatening situation never brings any better results rather it becomes boomerang for all involved.
Md. Masum Billah
Senior Manager: BRAC Education Programme, PACE
Cell: 01714-091431
Email: mmbillah2000@yahoo.com
Jyoti Basu passes away
Jyoti Basu, the relentless crusader against communalism passed away
Jyoit Basu , the embodiment of a statesman, politician, a lover of common mass and workers, a social reformer, a barrister and an innovator of industrial economics in the West Bengal, passed away leaving his ninety six years of eventful life. He was a figure not to be sunk into oblivion whatever political leaning an individual has. He has gone to his permanent place where all humans are rushing to. It is quite natural, still a bigger loss for India in particular and South Asia in general as we all have lost a great leader, an icon. From January 17 this zone goes without him.
His achievements will be judged by the extent to which he has transformed his ideas into reality. The major achievements of Basu in domestic affairs, since he came to power, are political stability and democracy. Land reforms and betterment of rural economies, a thoroughly non-communal ambience in the state and evolving a viable and multifaceted industrial policy even with limited powers make him longer living leader in the minds of millions. The industrial scene in the state has already changed significantly over the past few years and he intends to step up pace much more. These contributions form quite an impressive record as a statesman.
As chief minister of West Bengal he wooed private domestic and foreign investment for industrial development of the state. He toured extensively to allure more investments in West Bengal and he showed enviable success in his efforts. Today West Bengal witnesses industries of various sizes. He showed his clear pragmatic approach to political and economic issues to attract foreign investors in the face of strong criticism by his own party comrades. He was the main advocate for the initial participation of the Tatas in the Haldia Petrochemical Complex in West Bengal, which was among the first major industrial initiative during the left-ruled state. Basu said, “ We want capital, both foreign and domestic. After all we are working in a capitalist system. Socialism is not possible here.” His land reform policy has brought smiles to poor farmers of West Bengal. He distributed land to two million landless families.
From the very young age, Basu started taking interest in politics. In 1936 he joined London Majlis and elected as Secretary of London Majlis in 1937. Basu returned to India on 1st January 1940 and formally joined the Communist Party in India. He married to Basanti ( Chabi) Ghosh on 10the January 1940. On 11th May 1942 his wife Chabi died of typhod and his mother Hemlata. After six years Basu again got married to Kamal Basu on 5th December. Basu became the secretary of Friends of Soviet Union and Anti-Fascist Writer’s Association in Kolkata. As member of the Party, the initial task of Basu was to maintain liaison with underground Party leaders. He was entrusted responsibilities in the trade union front from 1944. In that year, Bengal Assam Railroad Workers’ Union was formed and Basu became its first secretary. Basu was elected to Bengal Provincial Assembly in 1946 from the Railway Workers constituency. Ratanal Brahman and Rupnarayn Rory were the other two Communists who were elected. From that day on, Basu became one of the most popular and influential legislators for decades to come. He showed how the Communists can use the legislative forums for strengthening struggles. Basu played a very active role in stormy days of 1946-47 when Bengal witnessed the Tebhaga movement, workers strikes and even communal riots. Everywhere the struggling people got Basu by their side. joyti Basu was the secretary of the West Bengal Provincial Committee of the Party from 1953 to January 1961. He was elected to Central Committee of the Party in 1951. 1948 and gave birth to a male child named Subhabrata Basu ( Chandan) on 12 September, 1952. Though 28 Communist candidates were elected to the West Bengal assembly in 1952, the then speaker refused to accord Basu , the status of the opposition . the recognition finally came in 1957 when Basu was re-elected from Baranagore constituency, the seat he retained till 1972 when he suffered the only electoral defeat in his political career.He emerged as an influential member of CPI(M) after the 1964 split in Communist Party of India over sharp ideological difference over the Sino-Indian war in 1962. He was a member of the Politburo from 1964 onwards. He was elected as a special invitee to PB in 19the Congress of the Party in 2008.
Basu was selected as a Provincial Committee Organizer of the Bengal Provincial Committee. He took part in all kind of political activities across the world. Basu laid a good foundation stone for Marxist in India. In 1972 elections were rigged and the Congress returned to power in West Bengal in 1972. Jyoti Basu as a result lost the elections from the Baraangar Assembly Constituency . jyoti Basu was forced to boycott the elections. Basu famously declared the new assembly as ‘assembly’ of the frauds’. And CIP boycotted the assembly for the next five years. Jyoti Basu belonged to the leadership of the CIP which steered the Party through the difficult days of semi-fascist terror in West Bengal in the early seventies. After the sweeping victory of the Left Front in 1977, Jyoti Basu became the Chief Minister of the Left Front. In 1977 he won the assembly seat from Satgacha and sworn in as Chief Minister of West Bengal on 21 June onwards continuously for an unprecedented five terms.
In 1980s he played a key role in convening a meeting of non-Congress chief ministers in Kolkata to raised their voice against the ‘step motherly’ attitude’ of the Congress government at the centre in close liaison with late NT Rama Rao of Andra Pradesh and late Ramkrishna Hedge of Krantaka. Basu’s political astuteness showed up once again when he succeeded in his efforts in late 1985 to convince late premier Ragiv Gandhi of the utility of forming a hill council to restore peace in strife –torn Darjeeling where the Gorkha Natioanl Liberation Front under subhas Ghising had waged a violent agitation for a separate state. The ear of coalition politics in India, which began in 1996, had offered him the chance to become the Prime Minster of the United Front Government in 1996 but his party CPI(M) declared to take over power at the centre. He obliged the party decision just like a loyal communist.
Bangladesh Jatya Sangsad paid a rich tribute to the great leader of the sub-continent Jyoti Basu by adopting an obituary reference unanimously , saying that he was a symbol of honesty, tolerance and ideology who will remain as a source of endless inspiration for posterity. Basu was a genuine friend of Bangladesh and he had helped the country in many ways for achieving independence and development. Dilip Barua, the minister for Industry of Bangladesh, said, the memory of Jyoti Basu would remain vivid in the memory of people as a rare personality and leader of the communist movement in the world. He played a very important role in signing the Ganges Water Agreement and Chittagong Hill Tracts peace Treaty. ‘India has lost a leader , Bangladesh has lost a well-wisher and I have lost a guardian’ commented Bangladesh Prime Minister Sheikh Hasia. Our leader of the opposition also said that this region has lost a great leader and Bangladesh also has lost a well wisher.
Jyoti Basu’s death came as a huge blow to Indian Communist movement as he was called the communists’ star poll campaigner. He was also called ‘a field marshal in a gentleman’s garb’. His personal charisma often drew a million supporters in his public meetings. Dr. Manomohan Singh, the Indian Prime Minister rightly said about Basu, ‘ He was a pragmatic visionary politician whose death marks the end of an era in the annuals of Indian politics.”
Md. Masum Billah
Senior Manager: BRAC Education Programme, PACE
Cell: 01714-091431
Jyoit Basu , the embodiment of a statesman, politician, a lover of common mass and workers, a social reformer, a barrister and an innovator of industrial economics in the West Bengal, passed away leaving his ninety six years of eventful life. He was a figure not to be sunk into oblivion whatever political leaning an individual has. He has gone to his permanent place where all humans are rushing to. It is quite natural, still a bigger loss for India in particular and South Asia in general as we all have lost a great leader, an icon. From January 17 this zone goes without him.
His achievements will be judged by the extent to which he has transformed his ideas into reality. The major achievements of Basu in domestic affairs, since he came to power, are political stability and democracy. Land reforms and betterment of rural economies, a thoroughly non-communal ambience in the state and evolving a viable and multifaceted industrial policy even with limited powers make him longer living leader in the minds of millions. The industrial scene in the state has already changed significantly over the past few years and he intends to step up pace much more. These contributions form quite an impressive record as a statesman.
As chief minister of West Bengal he wooed private domestic and foreign investment for industrial development of the state. He toured extensively to allure more investments in West Bengal and he showed enviable success in his efforts. Today West Bengal witnesses industries of various sizes. He showed his clear pragmatic approach to political and economic issues to attract foreign investors in the face of strong criticism by his own party comrades. He was the main advocate for the initial participation of the Tatas in the Haldia Petrochemical Complex in West Bengal, which was among the first major industrial initiative during the left-ruled state. Basu said, “ We want capital, both foreign and domestic. After all we are working in a capitalist system. Socialism is not possible here.” His land reform policy has brought smiles to poor farmers of West Bengal. He distributed land to two million landless families.
From the very young age, Basu started taking interest in politics. In 1936 he joined London Majlis and elected as Secretary of London Majlis in 1937. Basu returned to India on 1st January 1940 and formally joined the Communist Party in India. He married to Basanti ( Chabi) Ghosh on 10the January 1940. On 11th May 1942 his wife Chabi died of typhod and his mother Hemlata. After six years Basu again got married to Kamal Basu on 5th December. Basu became the secretary of Friends of Soviet Union and Anti-Fascist Writer’s Association in Kolkata. As member of the Party, the initial task of Basu was to maintain liaison with underground Party leaders. He was entrusted responsibilities in the trade union front from 1944. In that year, Bengal Assam Railroad Workers’ Union was formed and Basu became its first secretary. Basu was elected to Bengal Provincial Assembly in 1946 from the Railway Workers constituency. Ratanal Brahman and Rupnarayn Rory were the other two Communists who were elected. From that day on, Basu became one of the most popular and influential legislators for decades to come. He showed how the Communists can use the legislative forums for strengthening struggles. Basu played a very active role in stormy days of 1946-47 when Bengal witnessed the Tebhaga movement, workers strikes and even communal riots. Everywhere the struggling people got Basu by their side. joyti Basu was the secretary of the West Bengal Provincial Committee of the Party from 1953 to January 1961. He was elected to Central Committee of the Party in 1951. 1948 and gave birth to a male child named Subhabrata Basu ( Chandan) on 12 September, 1952. Though 28 Communist candidates were elected to the West Bengal assembly in 1952, the then speaker refused to accord Basu , the status of the opposition . the recognition finally came in 1957 when Basu was re-elected from Baranagore constituency, the seat he retained till 1972 when he suffered the only electoral defeat in his political career.He emerged as an influential member of CPI(M) after the 1964 split in Communist Party of India over sharp ideological difference over the Sino-Indian war in 1962. He was a member of the Politburo from 1964 onwards. He was elected as a special invitee to PB in 19the Congress of the Party in 2008.
Basu was selected as a Provincial Committee Organizer of the Bengal Provincial Committee. He took part in all kind of political activities across the world. Basu laid a good foundation stone for Marxist in India. In 1972 elections were rigged and the Congress returned to power in West Bengal in 1972. Jyoti Basu as a result lost the elections from the Baraangar Assembly Constituency . jyoti Basu was forced to boycott the elections. Basu famously declared the new assembly as ‘assembly’ of the frauds’. And CIP boycotted the assembly for the next five years. Jyoti Basu belonged to the leadership of the CIP which steered the Party through the difficult days of semi-fascist terror in West Bengal in the early seventies. After the sweeping victory of the Left Front in 1977, Jyoti Basu became the Chief Minister of the Left Front. In 1977 he won the assembly seat from Satgacha and sworn in as Chief Minister of West Bengal on 21 June onwards continuously for an unprecedented five terms.
In 1980s he played a key role in convening a meeting of non-Congress chief ministers in Kolkata to raised their voice against the ‘step motherly’ attitude’ of the Congress government at the centre in close liaison with late NT Rama Rao of Andra Pradesh and late Ramkrishna Hedge of Krantaka. Basu’s political astuteness showed up once again when he succeeded in his efforts in late 1985 to convince late premier Ragiv Gandhi of the utility of forming a hill council to restore peace in strife –torn Darjeeling where the Gorkha Natioanl Liberation Front under subhas Ghising had waged a violent agitation for a separate state. The ear of coalition politics in India, which began in 1996, had offered him the chance to become the Prime Minster of the United Front Government in 1996 but his party CPI(M) declared to take over power at the centre. He obliged the party decision just like a loyal communist.
Bangladesh Jatya Sangsad paid a rich tribute to the great leader of the sub-continent Jyoti Basu by adopting an obituary reference unanimously , saying that he was a symbol of honesty, tolerance and ideology who will remain as a source of endless inspiration for posterity. Basu was a genuine friend of Bangladesh and he had helped the country in many ways for achieving independence and development. Dilip Barua, the minister for Industry of Bangladesh, said, the memory of Jyoti Basu would remain vivid in the memory of people as a rare personality and leader of the communist movement in the world. He played a very important role in signing the Ganges Water Agreement and Chittagong Hill Tracts peace Treaty. ‘India has lost a leader , Bangladesh has lost a well-wisher and I have lost a guardian’ commented Bangladesh Prime Minister Sheikh Hasia. Our leader of the opposition also said that this region has lost a great leader and Bangladesh also has lost a well wisher.
Jyoti Basu’s death came as a huge blow to Indian Communist movement as he was called the communists’ star poll campaigner. He was also called ‘a field marshal in a gentleman’s garb’. His personal charisma often drew a million supporters in his public meetings. Dr. Manomohan Singh, the Indian Prime Minister rightly said about Basu, ‘ He was a pragmatic visionary politician whose death marks the end of an era in the annuals of Indian politics.”
Md. Masum Billah
Senior Manager: BRAC Education Programme, PACE
Cell: 01714-091431
Japan sees fifth Prime Minister in three years
Japan sees fifth Prime Minister in three years
Naoto Kan has become the fifth prime minister in three years in the second biggest economy of the globe, Japan. He defeated little –known Shinji Taruto, chairman of the lower house environmental committee, by a vote of 291-129 among Democratic Party of Japan members of Parliament. Kan, a former health minister who got his start in politics as a grassroots activist, has forged an image as fiscal conservative and occasional central bank critics since assuming the finance post in January. Unlike his recent predecessor Hatoyama, kan does not hail from a political dynasty. That could appeal to voters of leaders born with silver spoons in their mouths who proved inept at governing. He got his start in politics as a grassroots student activist, later joining small political parties before helping to found the then-opposition Democratic Party in 1996. His first speech after taking charge identified his biggest challenge ending two decades of stagnation. For the last twenty years, the Japanese economy has been at a standstill. Growth has stopped. Young people can’t find jobs. This is not a natural phenomenon. It resulted from policy mistakes.
Hatoyam ,the recent predecessor of Naoto, led the Democratic Party of Japan to a historic election victory in September in 2009, ousting the party which had led Japan for more than half a century. But Hatoyama resigned last week after barley nine months in the office. His credibility was tarnished by corruption scandals within his administration and his fate finally sealed after just nine months in office by claims of his capitulation to US pressure over the location of US military bases in Japan. “since last years election, I tried to change politics in which the people of Japan would be the main characters’ but his effort were not understood “ mainly because of my failings “his decision to keep the unpopular base on the island, despite strong local opposition, caused a split in his three-party coalition, with the small Social Democratic Party quitting the government .Hataoyama had faced growing pressure from within his own Democratic Party of Japan for him to step down to revive the party’s fortunes ahead of an election for the upper house of parliament expected on July 11.With tears in his eyes, Hatoyama told party legislators that he and Ichiro Ozawa, the party secretary general seen by many as the real power behind Hatoyama ‘s administration, would both resign. In order to revitalize our party, we need to bring back a thoroughly clean Democratic party. I would like to ask your co-operation” he said.
He had taken office pledging to create a ‘ more equal’ relationship with the US and promised to move the marine base off the island which hosts more than half the 47000 US troops stationed in Japan under a 50-year old security agreement. US military officials argue that it is essential the base remain on Okinawa because its helicopters and air assets support marine infantry units based there . Moving the facility off the island they say could, slow the marines co-ordinate and respond in times of emergency. Last week Htoyam said the would go along with a 2006 agreement to move the base to a northern part of Okinawa, infuriating residents who have long complained about noise levels, pollution and crime associated with troops from the base and want it off the island entirely.
Hatoyama has brought into question the competence of the entire party, the slick haired soft spoken Hataoyam who grew up in a well-to-do family of politicians, may have grown too out of touch with everyday people and their economic hardships. Hatoyama’s dramatic rise and fall has also thrown the US base issue-and Japan’s security relationship with the US-into limbo. The Pentagon is demanding that Japan adheres to a 2006 base agreement to keep the Futenma air base on Okinawa, while Okinawans are just as adamant that the base be moved somewhere else in Japan. However, inept Hatoyama’s performance as prime minster, many observers say his administration was needlessly undercut by Washington. One the highlights of the Democrats reforms, his administration launched a major review of government spending by holding court-like hearings, where government bureaucrats had to account for their budgets spending by holding court-like hearings, where government bureaucrats had to account for their budgets in front of live TV cameras and public spectators.He also won praise from environmentalists, but ire from Japanese business when he announced at the United Nations last September that he promised to cut Japan’s greenhouse emission 25 percent by 2020. Japanese industries were up in arms warning that the move could serve a low to the frail economy, but the move was also heralded by many as bold and forward –looking.
Hatoyama, a professor-like millionaire with a Ph.D. in engineering from Stanford University, was the fourth Japanese prime minister till last week. Viewed as somewhat aloof and eccentricity by the Japanese public, he earned the nickname ‘alien’. He was even pilloried for his fashion sense particularly a hideous multicolored checked shirt he wore to a barbecue in May. The shirt looks like it’s from the 80’s or 90s, one Japanese critic spluttered and his ideas and philosophy are equally old. Hatoyama, the grandson of a prime minister, acknowledged in a news conference broadcast nation wide that he had disappointed the country with his handling of the Futenma issue, as well as the funding scandal. “I was taking up many important efforts to make peoples lives well. It is extremely sad that no on is listening to me anymore” a teary Hatoyama said at a news conference. He continued, “ That is all due to my own failings. “Public support for the current government has slid to 17%, down four percentage points from a previous pOll two weeks ago according to the latest survey by the asshai. Disapproval ratings jumped from 70 to 64percent.
Since the charismatic Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi steeped down in 2006 at the end of his term, Japan has had four leaders resign in the span of four years. Naoto Kan, the present prime minister, became Japan’s most popular politician for a time when as health minster in 1996, he forced bureaucrats to expose a scandal over HIV-tainted products. May his promises such as economic reform focus on social welfare and smooth ties with the US become successful.
Md. Masum Billah
Senior Manager: BRAC Education Program, PACE
Phone: 9355253(home), 01714-091431(cell)
Email: mmbillah2000@yahoo.com
Naoto Kan has become the fifth prime minister in three years in the second biggest economy of the globe, Japan. He defeated little –known Shinji Taruto, chairman of the lower house environmental committee, by a vote of 291-129 among Democratic Party of Japan members of Parliament. Kan, a former health minister who got his start in politics as a grassroots activist, has forged an image as fiscal conservative and occasional central bank critics since assuming the finance post in January. Unlike his recent predecessor Hatoyama, kan does not hail from a political dynasty. That could appeal to voters of leaders born with silver spoons in their mouths who proved inept at governing. He got his start in politics as a grassroots student activist, later joining small political parties before helping to found the then-opposition Democratic Party in 1996. His first speech after taking charge identified his biggest challenge ending two decades of stagnation. For the last twenty years, the Japanese economy has been at a standstill. Growth has stopped. Young people can’t find jobs. This is not a natural phenomenon. It resulted from policy mistakes.
Hatoyam ,the recent predecessor of Naoto, led the Democratic Party of Japan to a historic election victory in September in 2009, ousting the party which had led Japan for more than half a century. But Hatoyama resigned last week after barley nine months in the office. His credibility was tarnished by corruption scandals within his administration and his fate finally sealed after just nine months in office by claims of his capitulation to US pressure over the location of US military bases in Japan. “since last years election, I tried to change politics in which the people of Japan would be the main characters’ but his effort were not understood “ mainly because of my failings “his decision to keep the unpopular base on the island, despite strong local opposition, caused a split in his three-party coalition, with the small Social Democratic Party quitting the government .Hataoyama had faced growing pressure from within his own Democratic Party of Japan for him to step down to revive the party’s fortunes ahead of an election for the upper house of parliament expected on July 11.With tears in his eyes, Hatoyama told party legislators that he and Ichiro Ozawa, the party secretary general seen by many as the real power behind Hatoyama ‘s administration, would both resign. In order to revitalize our party, we need to bring back a thoroughly clean Democratic party. I would like to ask your co-operation” he said.
He had taken office pledging to create a ‘ more equal’ relationship with the US and promised to move the marine base off the island which hosts more than half the 47000 US troops stationed in Japan under a 50-year old security agreement. US military officials argue that it is essential the base remain on Okinawa because its helicopters and air assets support marine infantry units based there . Moving the facility off the island they say could, slow the marines co-ordinate and respond in times of emergency. Last week Htoyam said the would go along with a 2006 agreement to move the base to a northern part of Okinawa, infuriating residents who have long complained about noise levels, pollution and crime associated with troops from the base and want it off the island entirely.
Hatoyama has brought into question the competence of the entire party, the slick haired soft spoken Hataoyam who grew up in a well-to-do family of politicians, may have grown too out of touch with everyday people and their economic hardships. Hatoyama’s dramatic rise and fall has also thrown the US base issue-and Japan’s security relationship with the US-into limbo. The Pentagon is demanding that Japan adheres to a 2006 base agreement to keep the Futenma air base on Okinawa, while Okinawans are just as adamant that the base be moved somewhere else in Japan. However, inept Hatoyama’s performance as prime minster, many observers say his administration was needlessly undercut by Washington. One the highlights of the Democrats reforms, his administration launched a major review of government spending by holding court-like hearings, where government bureaucrats had to account for their budgets spending by holding court-like hearings, where government bureaucrats had to account for their budgets in front of live TV cameras and public spectators.He also won praise from environmentalists, but ire from Japanese business when he announced at the United Nations last September that he promised to cut Japan’s greenhouse emission 25 percent by 2020. Japanese industries were up in arms warning that the move could serve a low to the frail economy, but the move was also heralded by many as bold and forward –looking.
Hatoyama, a professor-like millionaire with a Ph.D. in engineering from Stanford University, was the fourth Japanese prime minister till last week. Viewed as somewhat aloof and eccentricity by the Japanese public, he earned the nickname ‘alien’. He was even pilloried for his fashion sense particularly a hideous multicolored checked shirt he wore to a barbecue in May. The shirt looks like it’s from the 80’s or 90s, one Japanese critic spluttered and his ideas and philosophy are equally old. Hatoyama, the grandson of a prime minister, acknowledged in a news conference broadcast nation wide that he had disappointed the country with his handling of the Futenma issue, as well as the funding scandal. “I was taking up many important efforts to make peoples lives well. It is extremely sad that no on is listening to me anymore” a teary Hatoyama said at a news conference. He continued, “ That is all due to my own failings. “Public support for the current government has slid to 17%, down four percentage points from a previous pOll two weeks ago according to the latest survey by the asshai. Disapproval ratings jumped from 70 to 64percent.
Since the charismatic Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi steeped down in 2006 at the end of his term, Japan has had four leaders resign in the span of four years. Naoto Kan, the present prime minister, became Japan’s most popular politician for a time when as health minster in 1996, he forced bureaucrats to expose a scandal over HIV-tainted products. May his promises such as economic reform focus on social welfare and smooth ties with the US become successful.
Md. Masum Billah
Senior Manager: BRAC Education Program, PACE
Phone: 9355253(home), 01714-091431(cell)
Email: mmbillah2000@yahoo.com
Japan sees fifth Prime Minister in three years
Japan sees fifth Prime Minister in three years
Naoto Kan has become the fifth prime minister in three years in the second biggest economy of the globe, Japan. He defeated little –known Shinji Taruto, chairman of the lower house environmental committee, by a vote of 291-129 among Democratic Party of Japan members of Parliament. Kan, a former health minister who got his start in politics as a grassroots activist, has forged an image as fiscal conservative and occasional central bank critics since assuming the finance post in January. Unlike his recent predecessor Hatoyama, kan does not hail from a political dynasty. That could appeal to voters of leaders born with silver spoons in their mouths who proved inept at governing. He got his start in politics as a grassroots student activist, later joining small political parties before helping to found the then-opposition Democratic Party in 1996. His first speech after taking charge identified his biggest challenge ending two decades of stagnation. For the last twenty years, the Japanese economy has been at a standstill. Growth has stopped. Young people can’t find jobs. This is not a natural phenomenon. It resulted from policy mistakes.
Hatoyam ,the recent predecessor of Naoto, led the Democratic Party of Japan to a historic election victory in September in 2009, ousting the party which had led Japan for more than half a century. But Hatoyama resigned last week after barley nine months in the office. His credibility was tarnished by corruption scandals within his administration and his fate finally sealed after just nine months in office by claims of his capitulation to US pressure over the location of US military bases in Japan. “since last years election, I tried to change politics in which the people of Japan would be the main characters’ but his effort were not understood “ mainly because of my failings “his decision to keep the unpopular base on the island, despite strong local opposition, caused a split in his three-party coalition, with the small Social Democratic Party quitting the government .Hataoyama had faced growing pressure from within his own Democratic Party of Japan for him to step down to revive the party’s fortunes ahead of an election for the upper house of parliament expected on July 11.With tears in his eyes, Hatoyama told party legislators that he and Ichiro Ozawa, the party secretary general seen by many as the real power behind Hatoyama ‘s administration, would both resign. In order to revitalize our party, we need to bring back a thoroughly clean Democratic party. I would like to ask your co-operation” he said.
He had taken office pledging to create a ‘ more equal’ relationship with the US and promised to move the marine base off the island which hosts more than half the 47000 US troops stationed in Japan under a 50-year old security agreement. US military officials argue that it is essential the base remain on Okinawa because its helicopters and air assets support marine infantry units based there . Moving the facility off the island they say could, slow the marines co-ordinate and respond in times of emergency. Last week Htoyam said the would go along with a 2006 agreement to move the base to a northern part of Okinawa, infuriating residents who have long complained about noise levels, pollution and crime associated with troops from the base and want it off the island entirely.
Hatoyama has brought into question the competence of the entire party, the slick haired soft spoken Hataoyam who grew up in a well-to-do family of politicians, may have grown too out of touch with everyday people and their economic hardships. Hatoyama’s dramatic rise and fall has also thrown the US base issue-and Japan’s security relationship with the US-into limbo. The Pentagon is demanding that Japan adheres to a 2006 base agreement to keep the Futenma air base on Okinawa, while Okinawans are just as adamant that the base be moved somewhere else in Japan. However, inept Hatoyama’s performance as prime minster, many observers say his administration was needlessly undercut by Washington. One the highlights of the Democrats reforms, his administration launched a major review of government spending by holding court-like hearings, where government bureaucrats had to account for their budgets spending by holding court-like hearings, where government bureaucrats had to account for their budgets in front of live TV cameras and public spectators.He also won praise from environmentalists, but ire from Japanese business when he announced at the United Nations last September that he promised to cut Japan’s greenhouse emission 25 percent by 2020. Japanese industries were up in arms warning that the move could serve a low to the frail economy, but the move was also heralded by many as bold and forward –looking.
Hatoyama, a professor-like millionaire with a Ph.D. in engineering from Stanford University, was the fourth Japanese prime minister till last week. Viewed as somewhat aloof and eccentricity by the Japanese public, he earned the nickname ‘alien’. He was even pilloried for his fashion sense particularly a hideous multicolored checked shirt he wore to a barbecue in May. The shirt looks like it’s from the 80’s or 90s, one Japanese critic spluttered and his ideas and philosophy are equally old. Hatoyama, the grandson of a prime minister, acknowledged in a news conference broadcast nation wide that he had disappointed the country with his handling of the Futenma issue, as well as the funding scandal. “I was taking up many important efforts to make peoples lives well. It is extremely sad that no on is listening to me anymore” a teary Hatoyama said at a news conference. He continued, “ That is all due to my own failings. “Public support for the current government has slid to 17%, down four percentage points from a previous pOll two weeks ago according to the latest survey by the asshai. Disapproval ratings jumped from 70 to 64percent.
Since the charismatic Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi steeped down in 2006 at the end of his term, Japan has had four leaders resign in the span of four years. Naoto Kan, the present prime minister, became Japan’s most popular politician for a time when as health minster in 1996, he forced bureaucrats to expose a scandal over HIV-tainted products. May his promises such as economic reform focus on social welfare and smooth ties with the US become successful.
Md. Masum Billah
Senior Manager: BRAC Education Program, PACE
Phone: 9355253(home), 01714-091431(cell)
Email: mmbillah2000@yahoo.com
Naoto Kan has become the fifth prime minister in three years in the second biggest economy of the globe, Japan. He defeated little –known Shinji Taruto, chairman of the lower house environmental committee, by a vote of 291-129 among Democratic Party of Japan members of Parliament. Kan, a former health minister who got his start in politics as a grassroots activist, has forged an image as fiscal conservative and occasional central bank critics since assuming the finance post in January. Unlike his recent predecessor Hatoyama, kan does not hail from a political dynasty. That could appeal to voters of leaders born with silver spoons in their mouths who proved inept at governing. He got his start in politics as a grassroots student activist, later joining small political parties before helping to found the then-opposition Democratic Party in 1996. His first speech after taking charge identified his biggest challenge ending two decades of stagnation. For the last twenty years, the Japanese economy has been at a standstill. Growth has stopped. Young people can’t find jobs. This is not a natural phenomenon. It resulted from policy mistakes.
Hatoyam ,the recent predecessor of Naoto, led the Democratic Party of Japan to a historic election victory in September in 2009, ousting the party which had led Japan for more than half a century. But Hatoyama resigned last week after barley nine months in the office. His credibility was tarnished by corruption scandals within his administration and his fate finally sealed after just nine months in office by claims of his capitulation to US pressure over the location of US military bases in Japan. “since last years election, I tried to change politics in which the people of Japan would be the main characters’ but his effort were not understood “ mainly because of my failings “his decision to keep the unpopular base on the island, despite strong local opposition, caused a split in his three-party coalition, with the small Social Democratic Party quitting the government .Hataoyama had faced growing pressure from within his own Democratic Party of Japan for him to step down to revive the party’s fortunes ahead of an election for the upper house of parliament expected on July 11.With tears in his eyes, Hatoyama told party legislators that he and Ichiro Ozawa, the party secretary general seen by many as the real power behind Hatoyama ‘s administration, would both resign. In order to revitalize our party, we need to bring back a thoroughly clean Democratic party. I would like to ask your co-operation” he said.
He had taken office pledging to create a ‘ more equal’ relationship with the US and promised to move the marine base off the island which hosts more than half the 47000 US troops stationed in Japan under a 50-year old security agreement. US military officials argue that it is essential the base remain on Okinawa because its helicopters and air assets support marine infantry units based there . Moving the facility off the island they say could, slow the marines co-ordinate and respond in times of emergency. Last week Htoyam said the would go along with a 2006 agreement to move the base to a northern part of Okinawa, infuriating residents who have long complained about noise levels, pollution and crime associated with troops from the base and want it off the island entirely.
Hatoyama has brought into question the competence of the entire party, the slick haired soft spoken Hataoyam who grew up in a well-to-do family of politicians, may have grown too out of touch with everyday people and their economic hardships. Hatoyama’s dramatic rise and fall has also thrown the US base issue-and Japan’s security relationship with the US-into limbo. The Pentagon is demanding that Japan adheres to a 2006 base agreement to keep the Futenma air base on Okinawa, while Okinawans are just as adamant that the base be moved somewhere else in Japan. However, inept Hatoyama’s performance as prime minster, many observers say his administration was needlessly undercut by Washington. One the highlights of the Democrats reforms, his administration launched a major review of government spending by holding court-like hearings, where government bureaucrats had to account for their budgets spending by holding court-like hearings, where government bureaucrats had to account for their budgets in front of live TV cameras and public spectators.He also won praise from environmentalists, but ire from Japanese business when he announced at the United Nations last September that he promised to cut Japan’s greenhouse emission 25 percent by 2020. Japanese industries were up in arms warning that the move could serve a low to the frail economy, but the move was also heralded by many as bold and forward –looking.
Hatoyama, a professor-like millionaire with a Ph.D. in engineering from Stanford University, was the fourth Japanese prime minister till last week. Viewed as somewhat aloof and eccentricity by the Japanese public, he earned the nickname ‘alien’. He was even pilloried for his fashion sense particularly a hideous multicolored checked shirt he wore to a barbecue in May. The shirt looks like it’s from the 80’s or 90s, one Japanese critic spluttered and his ideas and philosophy are equally old. Hatoyama, the grandson of a prime minister, acknowledged in a news conference broadcast nation wide that he had disappointed the country with his handling of the Futenma issue, as well as the funding scandal. “I was taking up many important efforts to make peoples lives well. It is extremely sad that no on is listening to me anymore” a teary Hatoyama said at a news conference. He continued, “ That is all due to my own failings. “Public support for the current government has slid to 17%, down four percentage points from a previous pOll two weeks ago according to the latest survey by the asshai. Disapproval ratings jumped from 70 to 64percent.
Since the charismatic Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi steeped down in 2006 at the end of his term, Japan has had four leaders resign in the span of four years. Naoto Kan, the present prime minister, became Japan’s most popular politician for a time when as health minster in 1996, he forced bureaucrats to expose a scandal over HIV-tainted products. May his promises such as economic reform focus on social welfare and smooth ties with the US become successful.
Md. Masum Billah
Senior Manager: BRAC Education Program, PACE
Phone: 9355253(home), 01714-091431(cell)
Email: mmbillah2000@yahoo.com
Kurdish to play key role in forming government
Kurdish to play key role in forming government in Iraq
Iraq held its second national election on March 7, 2010 since Saddam Hossain was toppled. The election shored up the country’s fragile democracy but the months ahead were fraught with potential dangers far more worrying that the bombs that echoed through Baghdad as voters went to the polls over the weekend. Now Iraqi politicians ‘attention has turned to what sort of alliances are likely to be forged to form a new government because none of the parties by themselves are powerful enough to form a government. Early indications show prime ministers Nouri al- Maliki’s Rule of Law coalition leading in the south but former premier Iyad Allawi’ list coming in either second or third in each of the southern provinces. Mr. Maliki who heads the current Shiite-dominated government, has traditionally been strong in the Shiite south but voters across the country seem to be continuing a trend of turning away from region based parties in favour of coalitions they believe can offer them more basic things such as jobs and electricity.
The prime minister though remains personally popular for having taken on Shiite militias’-sending in the Iraqi Army to drive them out from Basra and other cities that had fallen under their control. His support declines, however, in the largely Sunni West and in the north where many Iraqis feel they have been neglected by the central government. Officials from the Independent High Electoral Commission estimated the turnout in the elections was 62 percent of the 19 million eligible voters. Despite the attackers in Baghdad and other cities including Mosul ,Faulah, Bauba and elsewhere, the election has been hailed as milestone in Iraq’s history. Insurgent had threaded to disrupt the elections but elections were held and now government is going to be formed as well. Allawi, a secular Shitte, who was installed as transitional prime minister by the US in 2003 heads a broader based coalition that is also seen as less sectarian. The major Kurdish parties are expected to play a key role in building or backing any coalition. None of the major parties will have enough votes to form the government so definitely the Kurds can play a very important role. Massoud Barzani, president of the Kurdish regional government told the Monitor in a recent interview. ‘For us in the Kurdishtan regions we are not going to decide on how to be part of the alliances because there are many important issues we should negotiate.’ He said that included the commitment of any potential coalition parties to solving the issue of Kurkuk, the disputed oil-rich city which Kurds claim as their historic capital.
So for Iraqis this election is going to be more intense than the last, as they understand there is much to lose if they do not participate. When the competition is more intense, the stakes are higher. We will likely see shortly some close outcomes potentially leading to disputed results. Political side will declare winners and losers. Passions will rise. This will create tension within the system and delays will result –potentially lengthening the timeline for the formation of Parliament and selection of a Prime Minister . but this is healthy. The expected and demanded change in Iraq is the only route toward the country’s stability; hence the map of new balances in the region will be declining the fears of Arab countries regarding the growing Iranian role. Internationally the election results are also important because Iraq’s stability will allow the US to proceed with its partial troop’s pullout schedule. This will also enhance US president Barack Obam’s positions in the yes of the US public. Of the European and others around the world a stable Iraq will be the best place for investment as the country has been reduced to rubble and needs to be rebuilt from scratch.
The great hope for Iraq’s March 7 national election was that could they restore faith in the democratic process and set a new tone of national purpose in Baghdad’s corridors of power and the great fear was that without clear winners and losers, the elections could produce months bitter infighting heightening the sectarian and ethnic tension behind the civil war that broke out after the 2005 election The results currently are so close with current Prime Minister Nouri-al- Maliki neck and neck with former Prime Minster Ayad Allawi, and the movement of radical Shiite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr emerging with what may be a kingmaker’s share of the vote----that Iraq could see months of deadlock that will do little to boost the country’s faith in it politicians. Moreover, the election results have broken down along depressingly familiar sectarian and the ethnic fault lines.
The major political blocs appeared to have recognized that no single ethnic group or sect could govern peacefully and effectively without making alliance across traditional fault line. The big parties put forward diverse coalitions preaching national unity, even if each retained a core identify well known to voter: Malikis State of Law coalition ran on a law and order platform but drew primarily from the moderate Shiite based. Malikit took a risk by separating himself from the Shiite Iraqi National Alliance that had propelled him to power but struggled nonetheless to present himself as a truly national figure. While he had cracked down hard against terrorism and militias, especially the radical Shiite followers of Moqtada al Sadr, his support for a government de-Baathification committee banned 500 parliamentary candidates. Malikis troubles have been a boon to the Sadrisits, who entered the elections as the junior partner in the INA but appear to be among the big winners of the elections and stand to win as many as 40 seats out of the 325 in the national assembly. Potentially making their support crucial for any would –be prime minister.
Another major stumbling block in the negotiations to form a government will be the oil-rich city of Kirkuk and the other disputed areas in northern Iraq. In a surprising turnout, the Kurdish parties appear to have lost Kirkuk by a slim margin to Allawi’s list which has taken a hard line against Kurdish claims to the city. Since Maliki whose current government was installed with Kurdish support but dragged its feet on Kurdish claims to Kirkuk-now are possible partners to form a government, he may find himself more dependent on them than ever.
Md. Masum Billah
Programme Manager: brac Education Program, PACE
10th floor, brac Centre, 75, Mohakhali, Dhaka1212.
Phone: 9881265-2422(off), 9355253(home), 01714-091431(cell)
Email: mmbillah2000@yahoo.com
Iraq held its second national election on March 7, 2010 since Saddam Hossain was toppled. The election shored up the country’s fragile democracy but the months ahead were fraught with potential dangers far more worrying that the bombs that echoed through Baghdad as voters went to the polls over the weekend. Now Iraqi politicians ‘attention has turned to what sort of alliances are likely to be forged to form a new government because none of the parties by themselves are powerful enough to form a government. Early indications show prime ministers Nouri al- Maliki’s Rule of Law coalition leading in the south but former premier Iyad Allawi’ list coming in either second or third in each of the southern provinces. Mr. Maliki who heads the current Shiite-dominated government, has traditionally been strong in the Shiite south but voters across the country seem to be continuing a trend of turning away from region based parties in favour of coalitions they believe can offer them more basic things such as jobs and electricity.
The prime minister though remains personally popular for having taken on Shiite militias’-sending in the Iraqi Army to drive them out from Basra and other cities that had fallen under their control. His support declines, however, in the largely Sunni West and in the north where many Iraqis feel they have been neglected by the central government. Officials from the Independent High Electoral Commission estimated the turnout in the elections was 62 percent of the 19 million eligible voters. Despite the attackers in Baghdad and other cities including Mosul ,Faulah, Bauba and elsewhere, the election has been hailed as milestone in Iraq’s history. Insurgent had threaded to disrupt the elections but elections were held and now government is going to be formed as well. Allawi, a secular Shitte, who was installed as transitional prime minister by the US in 2003 heads a broader based coalition that is also seen as less sectarian. The major Kurdish parties are expected to play a key role in building or backing any coalition. None of the major parties will have enough votes to form the government so definitely the Kurds can play a very important role. Massoud Barzani, president of the Kurdish regional government told the Monitor in a recent interview. ‘For us in the Kurdishtan regions we are not going to decide on how to be part of the alliances because there are many important issues we should negotiate.’ He said that included the commitment of any potential coalition parties to solving the issue of Kurkuk, the disputed oil-rich city which Kurds claim as their historic capital.
So for Iraqis this election is going to be more intense than the last, as they understand there is much to lose if they do not participate. When the competition is more intense, the stakes are higher. We will likely see shortly some close outcomes potentially leading to disputed results. Political side will declare winners and losers. Passions will rise. This will create tension within the system and delays will result –potentially lengthening the timeline for the formation of Parliament and selection of a Prime Minister . but this is healthy. The expected and demanded change in Iraq is the only route toward the country’s stability; hence the map of new balances in the region will be declining the fears of Arab countries regarding the growing Iranian role. Internationally the election results are also important because Iraq’s stability will allow the US to proceed with its partial troop’s pullout schedule. This will also enhance US president Barack Obam’s positions in the yes of the US public. Of the European and others around the world a stable Iraq will be the best place for investment as the country has been reduced to rubble and needs to be rebuilt from scratch.
The great hope for Iraq’s March 7 national election was that could they restore faith in the democratic process and set a new tone of national purpose in Baghdad’s corridors of power and the great fear was that without clear winners and losers, the elections could produce months bitter infighting heightening the sectarian and ethnic tension behind the civil war that broke out after the 2005 election The results currently are so close with current Prime Minister Nouri-al- Maliki neck and neck with former Prime Minster Ayad Allawi, and the movement of radical Shiite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr emerging with what may be a kingmaker’s share of the vote----that Iraq could see months of deadlock that will do little to boost the country’s faith in it politicians. Moreover, the election results have broken down along depressingly familiar sectarian and the ethnic fault lines.
The major political blocs appeared to have recognized that no single ethnic group or sect could govern peacefully and effectively without making alliance across traditional fault line. The big parties put forward diverse coalitions preaching national unity, even if each retained a core identify well known to voter: Malikis State of Law coalition ran on a law and order platform but drew primarily from the moderate Shiite based. Malikit took a risk by separating himself from the Shiite Iraqi National Alliance that had propelled him to power but struggled nonetheless to present himself as a truly national figure. While he had cracked down hard against terrorism and militias, especially the radical Shiite followers of Moqtada al Sadr, his support for a government de-Baathification committee banned 500 parliamentary candidates. Malikis troubles have been a boon to the Sadrisits, who entered the elections as the junior partner in the INA but appear to be among the big winners of the elections and stand to win as many as 40 seats out of the 325 in the national assembly. Potentially making their support crucial for any would –be prime minister.
Another major stumbling block in the negotiations to form a government will be the oil-rich city of Kirkuk and the other disputed areas in northern Iraq. In a surprising turnout, the Kurdish parties appear to have lost Kirkuk by a slim margin to Allawi’s list which has taken a hard line against Kurdish claims to the city. Since Maliki whose current government was installed with Kurdish support but dragged its feet on Kurdish claims to Kirkuk-now are possible partners to form a government, he may find himself more dependent on them than ever.
Md. Masum Billah
Programme Manager: brac Education Program, PACE
10th floor, brac Centre, 75, Mohakhali, Dhaka1212.
Phone: 9881265-2422(off), 9355253(home), 01714-091431(cell)
Email: mmbillah2000@yahoo.com
Responses to International Women’s Day
Responses to International Women’s Day
Globally on 8 March thousands of events take place to inspire women and celebrate achievements connecting women from all around the world. Their activities range from political rallies, business conference, government activities and networking events to fashion parades and more. Why this day? The majority of the world’s 1.3 billion absolute poor are women. For every 100 men, there are 98.6 women. There are nearly 1 billion adults in the world. Two out of every three of them is a woman. Out of every four households in the world, one is headed by a woman. There are 130 million children worldwide who are not in school. Two out of every three of these are girls. Over the last 50 years the most progress has been achieved in securing political rights for women, the right to vote and to be elected. Today, there are only a few countries where women cannot vote or run for public office. However, even though women can run for office in most countries, their presence in government is still very low. Only 24 women have been elected heads of states or government in this century, in 1995 there were 10 women heads of state. Although women’s representation at the highest level of government is generally weakest in Asia, four of these 10 held office in this region. Only 14.1 percent representative elected to Parliaments around the world is women, up from 11.7 in 1997. The percentage of female cabinet ministers worldwide has risen from 3 in 1987 to 6.2 percent in 1996. In early 1995 Sweden formed the world’s first cabinet to have equal numbers of men and women. Of the 189 highest ranking diplomats to the United Nations only eleven are women. The statistics itself says why we should observe Women’s Day internationally.
International women’s Day has been observed since in the early 1900’s, a time of great expansion and turbulence in the industrialized world that saw booming population growth and the rise of radical ideologies. Great unrest and critical debate was occurring among women. Women’s oppression and inequality was spurring women to become more vocal and active in campaigning for change. Then in 1908, 15000 women marched through New York City demanding shorter hours, better pay and voting rights. In accordance with a declaration by the Socialist Party of America, the first National Women’s Day was observed across the United States on 28 February, 1909. Women continued to celebrate National Women’s Day on the last Sunday of February until 1913.In 1910 a second international Conference of Working Women was held in Copenhagen. A woman named a Clara Zetkin who was the Leader of the Women’s Office for the Social Democratic Party in Germany tabled the idea of an international Women’s Day. She proposed that every year in every country there should be a celebration on the same day – A Women’s Day to press for their demands. Following the decision agreed at Copenhagen in 1911, International Women’s Day was honored the first time in Australia, Denmark, Germany and Switzerland on 19 March. More than one million women and men attended International Women’s Day rallies campaign for women’s rights to work, to vote, be trained, to hold public office and end discrimination. However, less than a week later on 25 March the tragic Triangle Fire in New York City took the lives of more than 140 working women. On the eve of World War 1 campaigning for peace, Russian women observed their first International women’s Day on the last Sunday in February 1913.On the last Sunday of February 1917 Russian women began a strike for ‘bread and peace’ in response to the death over two million Russian soldiers’ in war. Opposed by political leaders the women continued to strike until four days later the Czar was forced to abdicate and the provisional Government granted women the right to vote.
Showing due respect the Day is now an official holiday in China, Armenia, Russia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kirgizstan, Macedonia, Moldova, Mongolia, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan and Vietnam. The tradition encourages men honoring their mothers, wives, girlfriends, colleagues with flowers and small gifts. The new millennium has witnessed a significant change and attitudinal shift in both women’s’ and society’s thoughts about women’s equality and emancipation. However, great improvements have been made. We do have female astronauts and prime ministers, school girls are entering into colleges and universities. It is obvious that the tone and nature of International Women’s Day has for the past few years, moved from being a reminder about the negatives to a celebration of the positives. The United Nations General Assembly, composed of delegates from every member state, celebrates International Women’s Day to recognize that peace and social progress require the active participation and equality of women and to acknowledge the contribution of women to international peace and security.
On a worldwide level, women’s access to education and proper health care has increased their participation in the paid laborur force has grown and legislation that promises equal opportunities for women ad respect for their human rights has been adopted in many countries. The word now has an ever-growing number of women participating in society as policy makers. In Bangladesh over the last several years various programs have been undertaken both on government and non-government initiatives. The Female Secondary School Stipend Programme ( FSSAP) of the government has superseded its targets. Beginning as an experiment in 1982 by a local NGO in a single upazila with USAID financial assistance under the supervision of the Asia Foundation, it covered all secondary schools in 460 upazilas with the support of mutli-donors. It was a ground- breaking program which provided incentives to keep girls in schools and resulted in large increase in enrolments, delays in the age of marriage, higher number of single child families, improved birth spacing, more females employed with higher incomes, decrease in the amount of dowries and more confident and aware females who are involved in their children’s education. Girls’ enrolment increased from an average 0f 7.9 percent to 14 percent in some areas and drop out rates has fallen from 14.7 to 3.5.
In 1993 the Adolescent Development Program of brac launched ‘Reading Centres’ which was later renamed as ‘Kishori Kendra’. The initial innovative purpose was to retain the literacy of brac primary school graduates, who were not continuing the education. Now it is working with an explicitly stated goal to improve the quality of life of vulnerable adolescent especially girls of the villages. Now there exists about 8500 Adolescent Centers throughout the country with 215050 members. The ADP club is its one room rendezvous of a village which not only contain reading materials but they have become a safe place where the girls can socialize, play indoor games , sing , dance and exchange views and experience, know about the health hazards during the changing of their age and monthly periods. Some livelihood trainings are also provided to make them economically solvent.
Women’s equality benefits mostly women, but every one-percentile growth in female secondary schooling results in a 0.3 percent growth in the economy. Yet girls are often kept from receiving education in the poorest countries that would best benefit from the economic growth. Until the men and women work together to secure the rights full potential of women, lasting solutions to the world’s most serious social, economic and political problems will be difficult to address.
Md. Masum Billah
Programme Manager: BRAC Education Program, PACE
( The writer regularly writes on various national and international issues)
10th floor, brac Centre, 75, Mohakhali , Dhaka.
Cell: 01714-091431
Email: mmbillah2000@yahoo.com.
Date: March 04, 2010.
Globally on 8 March thousands of events take place to inspire women and celebrate achievements connecting women from all around the world. Their activities range from political rallies, business conference, government activities and networking events to fashion parades and more. Why this day? The majority of the world’s 1.3 billion absolute poor are women. For every 100 men, there are 98.6 women. There are nearly 1 billion adults in the world. Two out of every three of them is a woman. Out of every four households in the world, one is headed by a woman. There are 130 million children worldwide who are not in school. Two out of every three of these are girls. Over the last 50 years the most progress has been achieved in securing political rights for women, the right to vote and to be elected. Today, there are only a few countries where women cannot vote or run for public office. However, even though women can run for office in most countries, their presence in government is still very low. Only 24 women have been elected heads of states or government in this century, in 1995 there were 10 women heads of state. Although women’s representation at the highest level of government is generally weakest in Asia, four of these 10 held office in this region. Only 14.1 percent representative elected to Parliaments around the world is women, up from 11.7 in 1997. The percentage of female cabinet ministers worldwide has risen from 3 in 1987 to 6.2 percent in 1996. In early 1995 Sweden formed the world’s first cabinet to have equal numbers of men and women. Of the 189 highest ranking diplomats to the United Nations only eleven are women. The statistics itself says why we should observe Women’s Day internationally.
International women’s Day has been observed since in the early 1900’s, a time of great expansion and turbulence in the industrialized world that saw booming population growth and the rise of radical ideologies. Great unrest and critical debate was occurring among women. Women’s oppression and inequality was spurring women to become more vocal and active in campaigning for change. Then in 1908, 15000 women marched through New York City demanding shorter hours, better pay and voting rights. In accordance with a declaration by the Socialist Party of America, the first National Women’s Day was observed across the United States on 28 February, 1909. Women continued to celebrate National Women’s Day on the last Sunday of February until 1913.In 1910 a second international Conference of Working Women was held in Copenhagen. A woman named a Clara Zetkin who was the Leader of the Women’s Office for the Social Democratic Party in Germany tabled the idea of an international Women’s Day. She proposed that every year in every country there should be a celebration on the same day – A Women’s Day to press for their demands. Following the decision agreed at Copenhagen in 1911, International Women’s Day was honored the first time in Australia, Denmark, Germany and Switzerland on 19 March. More than one million women and men attended International Women’s Day rallies campaign for women’s rights to work, to vote, be trained, to hold public office and end discrimination. However, less than a week later on 25 March the tragic Triangle Fire in New York City took the lives of more than 140 working women. On the eve of World War 1 campaigning for peace, Russian women observed their first International women’s Day on the last Sunday in February 1913.On the last Sunday of February 1917 Russian women began a strike for ‘bread and peace’ in response to the death over two million Russian soldiers’ in war. Opposed by political leaders the women continued to strike until four days later the Czar was forced to abdicate and the provisional Government granted women the right to vote.
Showing due respect the Day is now an official holiday in China, Armenia, Russia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kirgizstan, Macedonia, Moldova, Mongolia, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan and Vietnam. The tradition encourages men honoring their mothers, wives, girlfriends, colleagues with flowers and small gifts. The new millennium has witnessed a significant change and attitudinal shift in both women’s’ and society’s thoughts about women’s equality and emancipation. However, great improvements have been made. We do have female astronauts and prime ministers, school girls are entering into colleges and universities. It is obvious that the tone and nature of International Women’s Day has for the past few years, moved from being a reminder about the negatives to a celebration of the positives. The United Nations General Assembly, composed of delegates from every member state, celebrates International Women’s Day to recognize that peace and social progress require the active participation and equality of women and to acknowledge the contribution of women to international peace and security.
On a worldwide level, women’s access to education and proper health care has increased their participation in the paid laborur force has grown and legislation that promises equal opportunities for women ad respect for their human rights has been adopted in many countries. The word now has an ever-growing number of women participating in society as policy makers. In Bangladesh over the last several years various programs have been undertaken both on government and non-government initiatives. The Female Secondary School Stipend Programme ( FSSAP) of the government has superseded its targets. Beginning as an experiment in 1982 by a local NGO in a single upazila with USAID financial assistance under the supervision of the Asia Foundation, it covered all secondary schools in 460 upazilas with the support of mutli-donors. It was a ground- breaking program which provided incentives to keep girls in schools and resulted in large increase in enrolments, delays in the age of marriage, higher number of single child families, improved birth spacing, more females employed with higher incomes, decrease in the amount of dowries and more confident and aware females who are involved in their children’s education. Girls’ enrolment increased from an average 0f 7.9 percent to 14 percent in some areas and drop out rates has fallen from 14.7 to 3.5.
In 1993 the Adolescent Development Program of brac launched ‘Reading Centres’ which was later renamed as ‘Kishori Kendra’. The initial innovative purpose was to retain the literacy of brac primary school graduates, who were not continuing the education. Now it is working with an explicitly stated goal to improve the quality of life of vulnerable adolescent especially girls of the villages. Now there exists about 8500 Adolescent Centers throughout the country with 215050 members. The ADP club is its one room rendezvous of a village which not only contain reading materials but they have become a safe place where the girls can socialize, play indoor games , sing , dance and exchange views and experience, know about the health hazards during the changing of their age and monthly periods. Some livelihood trainings are also provided to make them economically solvent.
Women’s equality benefits mostly women, but every one-percentile growth in female secondary schooling results in a 0.3 percent growth in the economy. Yet girls are often kept from receiving education in the poorest countries that would best benefit from the economic growth. Until the men and women work together to secure the rights full potential of women, lasting solutions to the world’s most serious social, economic and political problems will be difficult to address.
Md. Masum Billah
Programme Manager: BRAC Education Program, PACE
( The writer regularly writes on various national and international issues)
10th floor, brac Centre, 75, Mohakhali , Dhaka.
Cell: 01714-091431
Email: mmbillah2000@yahoo.com.
Date: March 04, 2010.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
