The New Nation - Internet Edition

Independence of Kosovo

THE declaration of independence by Kosovo is noted to be one of the few positive political developments in the international scene in recent years. The robust support to the same coming from the United States and the European Union (EU) countries are welcome developments. Serbia, the former occupiers of Kosovo, is making noises blaming the Western countries for violating international law in extending their diplomatic support to Kosovo's independence. Russia has joined in the chorus.

This is not unexpected because the Slavic people who are dominant in Serbia are racially, linguistically and culturally akin to the Russians. Serbia had long ruled Kosovo using brute force only and would loathe to see the territory slipping out of its hand. Russia is believed to see in the independence of Kosovo a signal for Chechnya, a Muslim majority area under occupation against the will of its people. The people of Kosovo have been fully within their rights and in adherence to international law while asserting their right to self-determination. International law upholds the sovereignty and indivisibility of states and also accepts the sovereign right of a people. Thus, there is nothing unlawful and ambiguous about Kosovo's independence.

Serbia lost any moral claim over Kosovo long ago after committing the worst genocide of Muslims there. The Western powers saved Kosovo's Muslims and they are now ready to give full diplomatic recognition to it and also to protect its independence in every way. Muslim countries should have been more in the forefront in recognising independent Kosovo. Bangladesh as one of the largest Muslim countries should be prompt in recognising its independence. Bangladesh would be only keeping in line with the international mainstream and upholding universally accepted principles both in terms of law and morality by quickly recognising Kosovo's independent existence.

Rationalising bank interest rates

THE top policymakers of the private commercial banks, the other day, raised the issue of linking their high charges and interest spreads to their service costs and the relatively high rates of government's saving instruments and treasury bills. The central bank had earlier asked them to find ways to lower their charges and gaps between deposit and lending rates. The banks should charge reasonable rates, which would be beneficial to businesses, the Bangladesh Bank governor said after a meeting with the members of the BAB (Bangladesh Association of Banks). The private banks agreed 'in principle' to rationalise charges and spreads.

As agreed upon, the BAB would put forward its suggestions by February 28 and the central bank would take the final decision scrutinising the whole situation. The central bank will find a way out taking into account the interests of depositors and shareholders. The governor of central bank said he had no intention to impose any decision on them. The chairman of the BAB stated that private banks gave prompt services and for that they recruited skilled and efficient manpower at higher salaries, which raised their costs.

The interest spread in most banks is about 6 per cent. It would be difficult to reduce spread when interest rate on National Savings Certificates remained 12 per cent and that on 20-year treasury bills 15.5 per cent. The banks still can reduce their spreads by minimising their own costs, as the average deposit rate was 6.76 per cent in September, while deposit grew by 7.3 per cent in July-December. Average spread between deposit and lending rates stands at 5.88 per cent in the state-owned banks, 6.17 per cent in private banks and the highest 8.91 per cent in foreign commercial banks. Rationalisation of interest rates is considered urgent.

Islamists big losers in Pakistan polls

Aamir Latif

ISLAMABAD: Between the many who have boycotted and the few who have contested, Islamic parties remain one of the biggest losers in Pakistan's general elections.

"This is not an unexpected results for me," Imtiaz Hussein, a Peshawar-based political analyst, told IslamOnline.net.

The Islamic parties had participated in the 2002 general elections under the banner of the Muttehida Majlis-e-Amal (MMA), a six-party coalition, and secured 66 seats in the 272-member National Assembly.

It also formed its own government in the North Western Frontier Province (NWFP) and was a major coalition partner in Balochistan government.

But this time, the MMA was cracks-stricken.

The Jammat-e-Islami, Pakistan's largest Islamic party, and two other components of the MMA alliance boycotted the elections.

Only the Jamiat Ulema Islam (JUI) of former parliamentary opposition leader Maulana Fazl-ur-Rehman, a friend of President Pervez Musharraf, and two other minor partners contested the polls.

Of the 262 constituencies announced, the JUI won only 5 national assembly seats down from 48 seats in the outgoing legislature.

The opposition Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) is leading with 87 seats followed by 67 for the Pakistan Muslim League (N) of former premier Nawaz Sharif.

The JUI got only 10 seats in the 99-member NWFP assembly, where it was the ruling party with 59 seats.

The left-wing Awami National Party (ANP), which was wiped out by the MMA in the 2002 elections, has regained its strongholds securing 31 seats up from 10.

The PPP stands second with 17 seats.

The JUI similarly won seven seats in the 51-member Balochistan Assembly, where it was a major ruling coalition partner with 14 assembly seats.

Split

Hussein, the analyst, insists it would not be accurate to say that the MMA has lost the elections.

"In fact the JUI has lost the elections, because the three out of six components of the MMA, especially Jammat-e-Islami, which has a sizable vote bank in most parts of the country, did not participate in the polls," he explained.

"The JUI has never been a nation-wide party. It has pockets with a strong vote bank in northern Balochistan, and southern parts of the NWFP."

Hussein notes that the circumstances in the 2002 elections were totally different.

"If a united MMA had participated in these elections, the situation would have been much better," he said.

JUI leader Maulana Fazl-ur-Rehman blamed Qazi Hussein Ahmad, the chief of Jammat-e-Islami, for their defeat.

"Qazi's boycott appears to be a setback to the MMA in these elections," he told reporters.

"I guess he understands this too. He and his team should confess to have committed a blunder that has shattered the MMA."

Musharraf Factor

"People this time have cast their votes, especially in NWFP against Musharraf's supporters, whether it is PML (Q) or the JUI."

But many experts link the JUI's crushing defeat to its support for unpopular Musharraf.

"It was not the issue of bad governance behind JUI or MMA's defeat in NWFP, it is mainly because of the JUI's support to Musharraf," said Hussein, the expert.

"People this time have cast their votes, especially in NWFP against Musharraf's supporters, whether it is PML (Q) or the JUI."

Maulana Fazl-ur-Rehman had supported embattled Musharraf very tactfully in every hour of need, contested the polls.

He helped Musharraf in the presidential elections by not dissolving the NWFP assembly on time.

"Fazl had been completely exposed by doing this. And the Jammat-e-Islami, whose ministers and assembly members resigned before the presidential elections, had decided to part its ways with him," Hussein said.

"If you look at the results, the JUI candidates have lost many seats by a difference of two to five thousand votes, which could have been coped with if the Jammat were in the election process."

The analyst believes that in 2002, the people cast their votes to a combination of religious parties, instead of individual religious parties or groups.

"If you look at the example of Peshawar valley, where the JUI has been totally wiped out, the combined vote of six religious parties is still higher than other parties.

"But because the JUI was contesting elections separately this time, therefore the Jammat-e-Islami, which has bigger vote bank than JUI here, stayed away from the polling giving an edge to the secular parties."

Ikram Sehgal, a Karachi-based analyst, says the deteriorating security situation in the last year of MMA stint in NWP and a lenient handling of pro-Taliban elements in the province propel Pushtuns to change their mind.

"The MMA government did not tackle the law and order situation, particularly vis-à-vis pro-Taliban elements, who have established a state within state even in some settled areas of NWFP, including Swat," he told IOL.

Army troops fought weeks-long battles with supporters of Maulana Fazlullah of the Tehrik Nifaz Shariat-e-Muhammedi in the northern district of Swat two months back.

"I knew that the MMA was going to loose in settled areas, but their defeat in mountains (tribal belt) is totally surprising to me," Sehgal said.

Reports reaching from South and North Wazisristan as well as other tribal agencies show none of the JUI candidates won there and all seven seats went to independent candidates.

Maulan Fazl-ur-Rehman lost his provincial assembly seat in his hometown, Dera Ismaeel Khan, which borders South Waziristan.

He lost to Faisal Karim Kundi, a young PPP candidate, by a huge margin of 40,000 votes.

Fazl, however, managed to become victor on a national assembly seat from Bannu district with a small margin of 1000 votes against an independent candidate.

"I cast my vote against Maulana Fazl this time because during the last five years, he proved that he doesn't deserve our votes," Hussein Ali, an engineer based in Dera Ismaeel Khan told IOL.

"He did everything to support and strengthen the status quo and Pervez Musharraf. We had voted for him for a change in status-quo."

Hamid Mir, a political analyst, says the Wazir and Mehsud tribesmen in Dera Ismaeel Khan not merely cast their votes in favor of the PPP candidate but also encouraged others to do that.

Wazir and Mehsud are the two powerful and rival tribes of South Waziristan.

Wazirs are known as pro-government Taliban, while Mehsuds led by most-wanted Baitullah Mehsud are anti-government Taliban.

"Tribesmen, including Wazirs and Mehsuds, have cast their vote against a person (Fazl) who played a key role in the re-election of Musharraf as president, whom they dub as responsible for Red Mosque tragedy," said Mir.

-IOL Correspondent

The roadmap to election and political dialogue

Mahmoud Rauf

Present Bangladesh government has declared the roadmap to parliamentary election in Bangladesh, and the political parties wanting the government to implement it. So far, according to the roadmap, election will take place before the end of 2008. But, I must say, Roadmap for the sake of a roadmap is not desirable to so many people of Bangladesh. It must come with some sort of commitment and guarantee that Bangladesh will not go back to the situation just before the 11th. January 2007.

We know that, we did have elected government and proper election in Bangladesh. Why do we need to ask for a roadmap for election now?

Therefore, we need to discuss and analyse the back ground and reasons for it.

I will start with a brief history since our liberation movement.

After a big sacrifice during the liberation movement in 1971, we had a progressive democratically elected government under Bangabandhu Shaikh Mujibur Rahman. His government was overthrown by a military clique after killing his whole family on 15th August 1975. I would like to say here that, the then military clique did not allow enough time for the new government, which has started from the ruins of destructions, to settle down and to do their job. The military clique ruled the country until 1990.

During the military rule, first General Ziaur Rahman came to power in 1975. He formed his political party Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP). Then General Ershad came to power in 1982 after General Zia was killed by another military clique. He again formed his own political party called Jatyo Party. Both parties were established when the generals were in power.

At the end of 1990 after a popular movement military rule ended. In 1991 we have proper election and have a properly elected democratic government.

Now the question is what have we achieved for all these years of democratic government?

10 years of B N P government gave us mostly corruption and corrupt practices in politics and in administration. During the 5 years of Awami League government, first 3 years was very good. But, final 2 years was as worse as BNP. At least this is what people think. Awami league, being a party gave leadership to the liberation struggle in 1971, failed to deliver what people expected from them.

People did not elect them to misrule the country through corrupt practices. People have elected them to develop the country by using the resources available so that general public can have a reasonable life. Instead of that, some corrupt politician became reckless to multiply their personal wealth at the expense of the state. Their party leaders did not or could not control them. This is the failure of the leadership. This is injustice to the general people of the country.

Situation just before 11 January : Between November 2006 and 11 January 2007, there was no rule of law. Practically, the son of ex-prime minister of BNP was running the country. High court, Election Commission, Anti corruption Commission, civil administration etc were controlled by the officials of last government. These are unacceptable.

The president of the country, a member of BNP, became the chief advisor. He used to follow the orders from the ex- prime minister and from her son, when people expected him to be impartial as chief advisor.

In the name of saving the constitution, he was following the orders from his political party.

Virtually whole administration was used for the interest of one party.

In other words, although, BNP was not in power, they were misusing the power through their appointed President and chief advisor Iaz uddin Ahmed.

Opposition parties of 14 party alliances under the leadership of Awami League were rightly resisting this illegal attempt.

As a result, the country was in the verge of civil war.

How the present government came to power: Under these circumstances, the patriotic army took initiative and asked the president to appoint the present caretaker government. Initially Awami league welcome them, and became proud supporter of this government, as they claimed, it is the result of their movement.

General public of the country were relieved as they have been saved from a civil war.

Present government supported by patriotic military force have taken an unprecedented measure and round up most of the corrupt politicians, administrators, businessmen and other corrupt people irrespective of parties. Lots of them fled abroad and some of them gone hiding, awaiting for this government to fall and they will come to surface.

Most of the peace loving people of Bangladesh supported these steps and welcome the present government. As far as we know, general Public is still supporting this government.

Because of the past bitter experience, people want present government to stay until the corrupted people are punished, so that, they cannot take control of the government again.

Here the truth is, People also want elected government as soon as possible, but people want honest politicians to run it. They do not want the repetition of previous corrupt practices.

People are not against the politicians or against established political parties. People are against corrupt politicians of these parties. Therefore, respective parties should clean up themselves and modernise the party. End of the day establish parties or the alliances will be the main forces of the election. So, they should prepare themselves as the people expect them to be.

However, people still want present government must stick to their promised roadmap to hold election before the end of 2008. At the same time, it is the duty of the present government to clean up the political and administrative system before the election. At least, they should start the cleaning up process for the future government.

Task infront of the present government before election: We must recognise that, Individual persons or leaders are not the main factor for the country. Introduction of democratic leadership within the parties will ensure the future capable leadership, which will be good for the political parties and for the country.

Present government must ensure that, the independent judiciary, independent election commission, independent Anti Corruption Commission and other government institutions will remain independent. These institutions should not be used for personal or party political purpose.

Present government must also guarantee that, the war criminals, communal elements, and the political parties which, do not believe in man made constitution of the country, should be disallowed to take part in the elections.

Otherwise, the existence of democratic, secular Bangladesh is in danger. Our democratic secular friends abroad must note this fact.

To create a balance of power, if necessary, present government may continue to keep the task force with a central body composed of distinguished people of the country for few more years. It can be in the form of a security council with power and authority.

This is become necessary due to the failure of our present system.

If the roadmap cannot guarantee the basic rights of the people, that roadmap is not going to be a successful one. Present government must not forget it.

5 points for political dialogue: In my observation, recently declared 5 points conditions for political dialogue are mostly pro-people suggestions which will, up to some extent, guarantee a better future for the people of the country. These will help to take the country to the prosperity and make the country a respectable one in the world society.

Bangladesh has enough resources capable to transform the country as good as Singapore, Hong Kong or similar, provided we have good governance. These 5 points are: (1). future parliament and the future government to approve the activities and amendments of present non-party government. (2). Approval of actions taken against corruption by the present government. (3). Stop Boycotting the future parliament, outlaw Hortals etc. (4). Not to nominate the corrupt people in future elections. (5) To Form national government for next three terms of the parliament.

The points about the role of students and trade unionists needed to be clarified. Their involvement in the party politics can be stopped, but their right to be involved to protect their members' interest, or their involvement to a movement of national interest, should not be minimised.

Subject to the clarification sought as above, I do not see any reason for the political parties not to accept these conditions before the election. Accepting these conditions by the political parties will offer the people of Bangladesh better governance, which will minimise the anti people and corrupt practices from politics. If the politicians do not accept these conditions, people can ask about their motive? People may ask, do they want to take the country back to the pre 11 January 2007? People of Bangladesh have the right to live without the fear of corrupt powerful politicians and their supporters.

In conclusion, I would like to say,

So far, the indications are that, the election will be held by as per declared roadmap. The chief advisor, the president, the army chief and the election commissioner have said so. We have no reason to think otherwise.

Now it is up to the political parties to co-operate, keep cool, modernise the parties and not to create any unwanted situation, so that, any one can make any excuse to delay the election to be held before the end of 2008. Unrealistic demands from the politicians will not enhance their credibility.

Opinion: Food from India

M.T.Hussain

Two authentic reports, one about rice import from India and the other shelter building by India in one cyclone- hit area of the 15th November 2007, learnt in Dhaka are somewhat amazing. About three months ago soon after the cyclone Sidr, the Indian government represented by the Foreign Minister Pranab Mukherjee then making a brief visit to Bangladesh promised for Bangladesh to import 5 million tons of rice from India and also themselves building shelter for some Bangladeshi people in a locality consisting of ten villages in the most devastated area of Sharankhola in southern area. Now after expiry of three months the news is that India has undertaken a treaty permitting Bangladesh to import just only 50,000 Tons of rice, shorter by 450,000 Tons.

The promised shelter building task is yet to begin having had only words and renewed promises by the local administration but in fact not a single shelter by India is built yet. Naturally thousands of poor people in the area have been passing days under open sky for the last three months.

Not only this. Neither our government nor any NGO has been allowed to make any shelter there for even few of the affected people, because, the Indians had promised to take the task there enbloc.

India is Bangladesh's big and powerful neighbor. She can do and undo many things in lending helping hands at times or make unkind postures at her own will and pleasure at other moment. India's natural advantage of land frontier keeps Bangladesh vulnerable on many accounts.

Provided the two countries could maintain cordial relations, both would be gaining. Otherwise, both could be looser. That is why both sides should promote an all time good relations. Unfortunately, the ideal situation is hampered of and on just as the two issues in the current news have been.

I have a personal viewpoint in these two matters. Why should Bangladesh be heavily dependant for rice and other essential food items on India? Can't we go for import from other sources?

Maiyanmar, Thailand, Cambodia and even Pakistan could be alternatively harnessed well ahead of time as regular sources for import of essential food grains.

About the shelter building matter, why should we have given a particular cluster of ten villages in the locality exclusively to India?

Cynics would say that Bangladesh need not add to number of enclaves of India inside Bangladesh territory, because, we have been having in the last 60 years since the partition of British India in 1947 vexing relations in matters of unsettled enclaves between the two from time to time. Instead whatever India wishes to offer for any such shelter-building project, their offer in cash and kind could well be received here with gratitude for us to spend as our end could do according to our own plan and priority.