[Reader-list] Lalon & Terror: Re-configuring Political Map During Emergency

[Shuddhabrata Sengupta]

Bangladesh is not, strictly speaking, an 'Islamic' country. The  
official title of the state is - The Peoples Republic of Bangladesh.

The post 'liberation' November 1972 constitution of Bangladesh made  
no mention of religion except to say that the state would not  
discriminate on the grounds of religion. It explicitly asserted that  
'secularism' was to be seen as a guiding instrument of state policy.

Islamic references were introduced into the constitution of  
Bangladesh during two periods of military dictatorship, First, under  
the reign of General Zia ur Rahman, an amendment to the Constitution   
in 1977 removed the principle of secularism that had been enshrined  
in Part II: Fundamental State Policy, replacing it with "absolute  
trust and faith in Almighty Allah."

Then, The Eighth Amendment of 1988, during the dictatorship of  
General Ershad, inserted Article 2A, affirming that "[t]he state  
religion of the Republic is Islam, but other religions may be  
practised in peace and harmony in the republic." This is somewhat of  
an ambiguous contradiction, because while it states that the state  
religion is Islam, it also simultaneously does shies away from  
asserting that Islam has any de-facto primacy.

Neither of these two amendments, however, has had popular democratic  
sanction, and both have been viewed as a negation of the founding  
principles of the liberation struggle which gave rise to Bangladesh.  
I am not a partisan of the secular Bengali Nationalism that inspired  
many during the liberation struggle, but I do know that the thousands  
of East Bengali Muslims, Hindus and others who willingly participated  
in that struggle did not do so in the belief that they were going to  
create an 'Islamic' Bengal.

  It has been argued, not without reason, that they could have been  
introduced into the constitution, through the back door, as it were,  
only during periods of military dictatorship. The current situation  
in Bangladesh, where the Lalon statues can be removed, is also  
imaginable only within the context of a military dictatorship,  
dressed up as 'transitional' civilian power. Military dictators in  
Bangladesh have always had to give their particularly corrupt  
despotisms the gloss and shine of Islam.

Despite both these amendments, Islamic law, the Sharia or the Sunnah  
are still not the primary sources of law in the legal system in  
Bangladesh, and no constitutional disabilities are attatched (unlike  
in Pakistan, Iran, Saudi Arabia or other Islamic states) to non  
Muslim citizens. Bangladesh continues to have a thriving 10% Hindu  
population, most of whom are wealthy, middle class and found in urban  
areas. Many of them have found and sought their own accommodations  
with corrupt military dictatorships. Durga Puja, for instance,  
continues to be observed with as much pomp and ostentation in  
Bangladesh as in neighbouring West Bengal. It is the Buddhist  
aboriginal minorities in the Chittagong Hill Tracts, and of course,  
Ahmediyas who have had to face real persecution in the name of Islam.

Nothing in the constitution of Bangladesh prevents a non muslim from  
holding political office, including that of the head of the state or  
government. In practice, the legal position vis a vis Islam in  
Bangladesh is less special even in comparison to that of the Church  
of England in the United Kingdom, or the Dutch Reformed Church in the  
Netherlands.

In practice, however, Bangladeshi politicians (of many varieties, and  
not only of the explicitly 'Islamist' parties) patronize Islamic  
fundamentalist goons exactly as their Indian counterparts patronize  
Hindu and Islamic fundamentalist goons in India.

Nothing, to me makes the removal of the Lalon statue appear sensible.  
It would not have been the case had Bangladesh indeed been a full  
fledged Islamic state (which it is not) nor does it make sense in the  
context of the current token 'Islamic' window dressing that adorns  
the (some) Peoples' Republic of Bangladesh

best

Shuddha

On 29-Oct-08, at 6:40 PM, Kshmendra Kaul wrote:

> Confining comments to the removal of the Baul Sculpture (whether it  
> included or not the statue of Lalon Fakir)
>
> Two weeks back, in a private mail, I had conveyed the following  
> thoughts:
>
> """"""""  The rationale behind the demand for removal of the  
> statues makes sense. The news report says that the statues are in  
> the 'hajj camp' area of the Airport. That would sure be upsetting.
>
> Bangladesh is an Islamic country so perhaps in any case, wherever  
> it might be,  a 'public' statue can tend to be viewed as something  
> forbidden lest it leads to deification. Pardon my ignorance, are  
> there such 'public statues' in Bangladesh? I presume, if none  
> others, there would be many of Bangbandhu and Nazrul
>
> I got introduced to Baul Music very late in my life. It is  
> exquisitely soul-touching.
>
> Maybe the Bauls, because of the roots, inspiration and content of  
> their music are especially a 'sore point' cultural inheritance for  
> the Islamists """""""""
>
> That generally seems to be along the lines of the views reported  
> of  Maulana Noor Hossain Noorani, Amir of Khatm-e-Nabuwat Andolon  
> Bangladesh and Imam of Fayedabad mosque.
>
> There have been wishful 'thought explorations' on this List and  
> elsewhere in the public domain about "Union" between India,  
> Bangladesh and Pakistan. That would neccessarily require some  
> degree of seamless congruity in Laws spread across the three  
> countries; not only Commercial Laws but Laws applicable to all  
> aspects of the lives of the citizens.
>
> Such a "Union" would also require one another important and  
> critical change (in my opinion). Either India would have to declare  
> itself a "Hindu" country or Bangladesh and Pakistan declare  
> themselves as "Secular".
>
> Kshmendra
>
>
>
> --- On Wed, 10/29/08, Shambhu Rahmat <shambhu.rahmat at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> From: Shambhu Rahmat <shambhu.rahmat at gmail.com>
> Subject: [Reader-list] Lalon & Terror: Re-configuring Political Map  
> During Emergency
> To: "sarai list" <reader-list at sarai.net>
> Date: Wednesday, October 29, 2008, 1:14 AM
>
> http://www.drishtipat.org/blog/2008/10/28/lalon-terror/
>
> From Rahnuma Ahmed's analysis of Lalon Statue controversy & larger
> "great game".
>
>    1. 'No decision is taken without the army chief's consent,
> that's
> why we informed him,' said Maulana Noor Hossain Noorani. According to
> reports, highup intelligence agency officials (DGFI, NSI) had mediated
> contacts between the ruling party and the KN. He had met the DGFI
> chief in Dhaka cantonment thrice, Noorani had thus boasted to Satkhira
> reporters in 2005
>    2. Twenty-two months later…with their respective parties in
> shambles, thousands of party workers in prison, constitutional rights
> suspended due to the state of emergency, economy in tatters, police
> crack-downs on protests of garments workers, jute mill workers,
> women's organisations and activists, on human chains against
> increasing prices of essentials, the only two forces to have remained
> unscathed are the Jamaat-e-Islami, and Muslim clerics, Islamic parties
> and madrasa students
>    3. The US government's role in not only contributing to the
> situation, but in constituting the conditions that have given rise to
> extremes, of being the extreme, is disregarded by many Bangladesh
> scholars
>    4. Pakistan, America's strong military ally, is now "on the
> edge"
> of ruin. Pakistani political analysts repeatedly warn Bangladeshis
> that they see similar political patterns at work here: minusing
> political leaders, militarisation, milbus, National Security Council
> etc etc. Are we being set on America's flight path to greater power by
> this unconstitutional, unrepresentative government, one which is more
> accountable to western forces, than to us?
>
> Lalon and Terror: Re-configuring the Nation's Political Map during
> Emergency
> by rahnuma ahmed (New Age, Oct 29, 2008)
>
> Baul sculpture, and the nation's most powerful man
>
> 'No decision is taken without the army chief's consent, that's why
> we
> informed him,' said Maulana Noor Hossain Noorani, amir of Khatme
> Nabuwat Andolon Bangladesh and imam of Fayedabad mosque, at a press
> conference. `He didn't like the idea of setting up an idol either,
> right in front of the airport, so close to the Haji camp. It was
> removed at his initiative' (Prothom Alo, 17 October).
>
> The `it' in question was a piece of sculpture, of five Baul mystics
> and singers. Titled Unknown Bird in a Cage, it was being created in
> front of Zia International Airport, Dhaka. Madrasa students and masjid
> imams of adjoining areas were mobilised, Bimanbondor Golchottor Murti
> Protirodh Committee (Committee to Resist Idols at Airport Roundabout)
> was formed. A 24 hour ultimatum was given. The art work, nearly
> seventy percent complete, was removed by employees of the Roads and
> Highways Department, and Civil Aviation Authority of Bangladesh.
>
> Artists, intellectuals, cultural activists, writers, teachers,
> students, and many others have since continuously protested the
> removal of the sculpture, both in Dhaka, and other cities and towns of
> Bangladesh. They have demanded its restoration, have re-named the
> roundabout Lalon Chottor, and accused the military-backed caretaker
> government of capitulating, yet again, to the demands of Islamic
> extremists, and forces opposing the 1971 war of liberation.
>
> Soon after its removal, Fazlul Haq Amini, Chairman of a faction of
> Islami Oikya Jote (IOJ) and amir of Islami Ain Bastabayan Committee
> (IABC) said at a press conference, if an Islamic government comes to
> power, all statues built by Sheikh Hasina's government (1996-2001)
> will be demolished, since statues are `dangerously anti-Islamic'.
> Eternal flames, Shikha Chironton (Liberation War Museum), and Shikha
> Anirban (Dhaka Cantonment) will be extinguished. Paying respect to
> fire is the same as worshipping fire.' What about statues built during
> Khaleda Zia-led four party alliance government (of which he had been a
> part). 'Where, which ones?' Rajshahi University campus was the prompt
> reply. `Why didn't you raise these questions when you were in power?'
> 'We did, personally, but they didn't listen. We were used as stepping
> stones.' Amini also demanded that the National Women Development
> Policy 2008, shelved this year after protests by a section of Muslim
> clerics and some Islamic parties, should be scrapped (Prothom Alo, 18
> October).
>
> Noorani and his followers demand, a haj minar should be built instead,
> and the road should be re-named Haj road. 'Men from the administration
> and the intelligence agencies,' he said at the press conference, `wore
> off their shoes, they kept coming to us.' (Prothom Alo, 17 October).
> Now where had I read of close contacts between Khatme Nabuwat and the
> intelligence agencies?
>
> I remembered. A Human Rights Watch report, Bangladesh: Breach of Faith
> (2005) had stated that KN had close links to the ruling BNP through
> the Jamaat-e-Islami and the IOJ, its coalition partners. I remembered
> other things too. It was the same Noor Hossain Noorani who had said,
> Tareq Zia, Senior Secretary General of the BNP, was their "Amir and
> same-aged friend," and had threatened police officials saying Tareq
> would directly intervene if Khatme Nabuwat's anti-Ahmadiya campaign
> was obstructed. According to reports, highup intelligence agency
> officials (DGFI, NSI) had mediated contacts between the ruling party
> and the KN. He had met the DGFI chief in Dhaka cantonment thrice,
> Noorani had thus boasted to Satkhira reporters in 2005, a statement
> never publicly refuted by the intelligence agency (Tasneem Khalil, The
> Prince of Bogra, Forum, April 2007, issue withdrawn, article available
> on the internet).
>
> What links does the present military-backed caretaker government, and
> more so, its intelligence agencies, have with these extremist groups?
> I cannot help but wonder. Is there more to what's happening than meets
> the eye?
>
> Other questions pop into my head. The Baul sculpture was not
> advertised, as public art should be. No open competition, no
> shortlisting, no selection panel. On the contrary, the contract seems
> to have been awarded as a personal dispensation. The only condition
> seems to have been that the sculptor must get-hold-of-a-sponsor. High
> regard for public art, for Baul tradition, listed by the UNESCO as a
> world cultural heritage, and for procedural matters. Particularly by a
> government whose raison d'etre is establishing the rule of law, and
> rooting out corruption.
>
> Simplifying the present: from `1971′ to the `Talibanisation' of
> Bangladesh
>
> British historian Eric Hobsbawm terms what he calls the 'short
> twentieth century', The Age of Extremes (1994). I can't help but
> think, things seem to be getting more extreme in the twenty-first
> century.
>
> In his most recent book, On Empire. America, War and Global Supremacy
> (2008), Hobsbawm traces the rise of American hegemony, the steadily
> increasing world disorder in the context of rapidly growing
> inequalities created by rampant free-market globalisation, the
> American government's use of the threat of terrorism as an excuse for
> unilateral deployment of its global power, the launching of wars of
> aggression when it sees fit, and its absolute disregard of formerly
> accepted international conventions.
>
> The US government's role in not only contributing to the situation,
> but in constituting the conditions that have given rise to extremes,
> of being the extreme, is disregarded by many Bangladesh scholars,
> whether at home or abroad. Most of these writings are atrociously
> naive, exhibiting a theoretical incapacity to deal with questions of
> global inequalities in power. Authors repeatedly portray American
> power ― in whichever manifestation, whether economic or cultural,
> military or ideological ― as being benign. Two images of Bangladesh
> are juxtaposed against each other, a secular Bangladesh of the early
> 1970s, the fruit of Bangladesh's liberation struggle of 1971, and a
> Talibanised Bangladesh of recent years. `National particularities' and
> 'the dynamics of domestic policies' are emphasised (undoubtedly
> important), but inevitably at the cost of leaving the policies of US
> empire-building efforts un-examined.
>
> One instance is Maneeza Hossain, Senior Fellow at the Hudson
> Institute, who, in her 60 page study of the growth of Islamism in
> Bangladesh politics, tucks in a hurried mention of US' supply of
> weaponry to Afghan jihadists, and moves on to call on the US to shake
> off its `indifference' to Bangladesh, to use its 'good offices' to
> help democratic forces within Bangladesh prevail (The Broken Pendulum.
> Bangladesh's Swing to Radicalism, 2007).
>
> Ali Riaz, who teaches at Illinois State University, author of God
> Willing. The Politics of Islamism in Bangladesh (2004) provides
> another instance. International reasons for the rise of militancy are
> the Afghan war, internationalisation of resistance to Soviet
> occupation, policies of so-called charitable organisations of the
> Middle East and Persian Gulf, and (last, it would also seem, the
> least) `American foreign policy'. A token mention showing utter
> disregard towards 1,273,378 Iraqi deaths, caused by the invasion and
> occupation. 1971 was genocidal, but so is the Iraq invasion. On a much
> larger scale. Unconcerned, he goes on, policy circles in the US are
> `apprehensive' about militancy in Bangladesh. Even now. The solution?
> He advocates open debates, particularly between the intelligence
> agencies and the political parties (Prothom Alo, 3 February 2008).
>
> And then one comes across Farooq Sobhan who claims that president Bush
> has 'taken pains' to convince Muslims that the war against terror is
> not a war against Islam or a clash of civilizations (no, it's a crime
> against humanity). Rather petulantly, he asks, why has Bangladesh, a
> Muslim majority country, not figured prominently on the US 'list of
> countries to be wooed and cultivated.' Further, he writes, "High on
> the US agenda has been the issue of Bangladesh sending troops to
> Iraq." Sending 'troops', like crates of banana, or tea? Surely,
> there
> are substantive issues ― of death and destruction of Iraqis and  
> Iraq,
> of war crimes ― involved.
>
> Re-configuring Politics during Emergency
>
> Creating a level playing field so that free and fair national
> elections could be held, that's what the military-backed caretaker
> government had promised. Twenty-two months later, after failed
> attempts at minusing Khaleda Zia and Sheikh Hasina, with their
> respective parties in shambles, thousands of party workers in prison,
> constitutional rights suspended due to the state of emergency, economy
> in tatters, police crack-downs on protests of garments workers, jute
> mill workers, women's organisations and activists, on human chains
> against increasing prices of essentials, the only two forces to have
> remained unscathed are the Jamaat-e-Islami, and Muslim clerics,
> Islamic parties and madrasa students, those who protested against the
> Women Development Policy, agitated for the removal of Baul sculptures,
> recently caused havoc in the DU Vice Chancellor's office protesting
> against newly-enforced admission requirements. Are these accidental,
> or deliberate governmental moves? I cannot help but wonder.
>
> Several western diplomats ― members of the infamous Tuesday Club,
> particularly ambassadors from United States, Britain, Canada,
> Australia, and the EU representative ― and also the UN Resident
> Coordinator actively intervened in Bangladesh politics prior to 11
> January 2007, in events that led to the emergence of the present
> military-backed caretaker goverment. Renata Dessalien did so to
> unheard degrees, leading to recent demands that the UN Resident
> Coordinator be withdrawn.
>
> In a week or so, the UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon arrives in
> Dhaka, to see for himself electoral preparations, and extend support
> for the government. A visit that has nothing to do with politics, we
> are told. In the eyes of many observers, Ban is one of the most
> pro-American secretaries general in it's 62-year history. He has
> opposed calls for a swift US withdrawal from Iraq, and is committed to
> a beefed-up UN presence in Baghdad. The UN staff committee has
> protested Ban's decision saying it would `make the institution
> complicit in an intractable US-made crisis' (Washington Post, 24
> September 2007).
>
> In the name of bringing 'beauty' to politics in Bangladesh, the
> lineaments of political reconfiguration undertaken by this
> military-backed caretaker government are becoming ominously clear:
> mainstream political parties in shambles, Jamaat-e-Islami intact
> (`democratic party,' Richard Boucher, US Assistant Secretary of State,
> 2006), Muslim clerics and Islamic forces re-emerging as a political
> force under state patronage, and the exercise of rampant power by
> western diplomats.
>
> A beast in the guise of beauty? Time will tell.
>
> On the Flight Path of American Power
>
> I borrow the title from British-Pakistani historian Tariq Ali's coming
> event: `Pakistan/Afghanistan: on the Flight Path of American Power,'
> to be held at Toronto, November 14.
>
> Seven years after the US led invasion, Pakistan, America's strong
> military ally, is now "on the edge" of ruin. Pakistani political
> analysts repeatedly warn Bangladeshis that they see similar political
> patterns at work here: minusing political leaders, militarisation,
> milbus, National Security Council etc etc. I do not think that an
> Obama win will make any difference to the American flight path for
> unilateral power. As atute political commentators point out, Obama and
> McCain differ on domestic policies, not substantively on US foreign
> policy. A couple of days ago, president Bush signed the highest
> defense budget since World War II.
>
> Maybe there should be an open public debate in Bangladesh, as Ali Riaz
> proposes, but with a different agenda: are we being set on America's
> flight path to greater power by this unconstitutional,
> unrepresentative government, one which is more accountable to western
> forces, than to us?
>
> Drifting in cage and out again
>
> Hark unknown bird does fly
>
> Shackles of my heart
>
> If my arms could entwine
>
> With them I would thee bind
>
> ― Fakir Lalon Shah, "Khachar bhitor ochin pakhi,"
>
> translation by Shahidul Alam.
> _________________________________________
> reader-list: an open discussion list on media and the city.
> Critiques & Collaborations
> To subscribe: send an email to reader-list-request at sarai.net with  
> subscribe in
> the subject header.
> To unsubscribe: https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list
> List archive: &lt;https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>
>
>
>
> _________________________________________
> reader-list: an open discussion list on media and the city.
> Critiques & Collaborations
> To subscribe: send an email to reader-list-request at sarai.net with  
> subscribe in the subject header.
> To unsubscribe: https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list
> List archive: &lt;https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>

Shuddhabrata Sengupta
The Sarai Programme at CSDS
Raqs Media Collective
shuddha at sarai.net
www.sarai.net
www.raqsmediacollective.net