Cry for me, Bangladesh

The Washington Times ^ | February 18, 2006 | Arnaud de Borchgrave

[neverdem]

    The world's second-largest Muslim state -- at 150 million, co-equal with Pakistan, and behind Indonesia -- Bangladesh was well on its way to falling victim to a coalition of pro-al Qaeda politico-religious extremists. Almost unnoticed, they have been gnawing away at Bangladesh's fragile democratic institutions.

    Prime Minister Khaleda Zia's husband was former president and military strongman Ziaur Rahman. He was assassinated in 1981. Her rival and head of the Awami League is another woman, Sheikh Hasina Wajed. Her father was the country's first prime minister, assassinated in 1975.

    Under Mrs. Zia's leadership, the Bangladesh National Party (BNP) has appeased Islamist fundamentalists by including Osama bin Laden's local fan club in her government. To wit: Jamaat-e-Islami stands for an Islamic republic. BNP coalition partner Islami Okiyya Jote is linked to the pro-al Qaeda Harkat-ul-Jihad-Al Islami (HuJI), which in turn is linked to Jamaat-ul-Mujahideen Bangladesh (JMB), which wants to impose Sharia law by force. It is widely believed responsible for a countrywide wave of some 500 bombings last Aug. 17.

    HuJI, or Movement of Islamic Holy War, is in league with some of Pakistan's officially banned but still tolerated extremist groups. The Indian army liberated Bangladesh, formerly East Pakistan, in 1971 after a bloody civil war.

    JMB leader Bangla Bhai favors a Taliban-style medieval theocracy, yet another reason opposition Awami League leader Sheikh Hasina accused the government coalition of "letting loose criminal extremist forces."

    Radical Islamist organizations proliferate in the cities, funded by at least 10 Middle Eastern charities, while terrorist training camps have been reported in dense jungle areas to the north. Indian intelligence, which closely watches its former ward, believes it has tracked more than 170 concentrations of pro-al Qaeda militants, including members of Jemaah Islamiyah (JI), the Indonesia terrorist group responsible for the Bali...

[ncountylee]

India reacted properly and built a wall to keep the vermin at bay.

[montag813]

Replace one domino theory with another. This one is much more insidious and dangerous.

[GSlob]

That's what one gets for liberating them. They had a "bloody civil war in '71"- they should have let them have fun with it, instead of interrupting and liberating.

[Don W]

So you're saying "Let them kill the Buddhists, Hindu's, other animists, and Christians without consequence, and it's all good.

Oh to live in such a world. Nevermind, we already DO!

It's obvious that liberals aren't the only ones who don't think out the WHOLE of what they spew.

India's intervention in the Pakistan (E vs W) was wholly in the interest of stabilizing the muslim threat, AT THAT TIME. Unfortunately, the threat has grown.

While I'm not fully versed in the repercussions (I was 10 years old) of the Indian aid to the INDEPENDANCE of Bangladesh, I don't see much of a downside to that military adventure, except that the muzzies are now running rampant there too.

No good deed goes unpunished, I've heard.

[GSlob]

One should not stretch and distort the meaning beyond what was there: it is not "Let them kill the Buddhists, Hindu's, other animists, and Christians without consequence," but rather "let [fill in your list] kill themselves", for this is what a civil war is all about. I. for one, see the difference.

[CountryLawyer]

Bangladesh is spiraling into chaos. A civil war with a number of sides is possible (and in my view is already in progress, depending on your definition of "civil war");. A third (actually there are a number of smaller parties) party has been formed, but mainly it is a split off of the current government.

But the day is coming shortly when the current government will have to either comply with or reject the provisions of the constitution. My bet is that they will ignore the constitution (but will probably try to make it look like they aren't).

The constitution's choice for interim president has turned down the job (after determining, it is said, that he would not likely survive the short term of office). The designated successor has said he would take the job if all parties agree (little chance of that, because he is a true neutral).

I am not a fan of military takeovers. However, the situation is so dire that I fear the only organization that can reduce the violence and stop the decent into chaos is....the army.

And if that is to be done, it will be led by the younger officers.

The country'economic elite are not likely the source of any significant leadership, as

1. They have little knowledge of what is going on in their own country (they live in isolated, walled off areas and generally do not deal with ordinary folks),

2. Many are fleeing the country and will not be there to do anything, and

3. A high percentage made their money though corruption (which is endemic in Bangladesh), and everybody knows it.

I suspect the army will eventually leave its Cantonments as it sees the situation worsen (it is already very problematic--many are dying in the streets) and realizes it is the only hope for Bangladesh.

It is likely the US Embassy, Dhaka, is running full bore 24/7. I wish them good luck.

Ask not for whom the bell tolls, it tolls for democracy in Bangladesh.