The New Nation - Internet Edition

New obligations for the EC

ONLY about a week ago, The Election Commission (EC) received a jolt when about 30 persons with records of criminality, corruption and conviction, were cleared by the Supreme Court as fit to contest the election. At around the same time, allegations were made by the leader of a major political party that fake ballot papers in hundreds of thousands were detected by him. It was also reported that in some 40 constituencies, the returning officers and assistant returning officers are hard core supporters of a certain political party. The Transparency International Bangladesh (TIB) on Wednesday stated that 142 candidates had spent in excess of the Taka 1.5 lakh allowable limit per candidate ahead of the time of election spending.

So, what remains of the goal of holding a free and fair election not influenced by unlimited spending of money and other irregularities? Even in the selection of candidates, the main two parties were reported to have thrown all previous pledges made to the winds of making the process democratic and grassroots based. Party bosses were able to once again monopolise the nomination process and huge money was allegedly put into their pockets by candidates to clinch the nominations. It is too late for the Election Commission (EC) to do anything immediately about such violation of election rules.

The EC has promised not to let matters rest but intends to take up after the election the issues. The commission ought to follow up also the cases of overspending, vote buying and attempts to rig the elections. The EC will be expected to show some spine and assert its independence in the post-election period to press the violators of election rules to account for their behaviour and suffer appropriate penalties.

Making best use of IDB support

THE resources from The Islamic Development Bank (IDB) are not so well utilised in Bangladesh. There are opportunities for a change in approach on the part of our government, particularly after last year's visit of its President, Ahmad Mohammad Ali. The IDB President made commitments during his visit which have much significance for this country when loans and grants from the traditional donor countries and organisations are seen to be falling and the terms and conditions for getting the same are proving to be increasingly difficult and risky.

Thus, it was very inspirational to learn from the IDB President that Bangladesh would be the beneficiary of $ 2.0 billion out of a special solidarity fund that his organisation had mobilised to be disbursed over a period of ten years among Muslim countries. This assistance would be invaluable for Bangladesh. The IDB assistance can be a strong plus factor for the economy if the assistance is spread over the short, medium and long terms under favourable terms and conditions. The IDB President, while in Dhaka, signed three agreements totaling $9.19 million that reflected a good mix of grants and loans. Besides, the rates of interest charged by IDB on their loans as well as the period of repayment are also found to be favouring the recipient countries.

But the potential of assistance from the IDB for Bangladesh involves making most of the new opportunities which are opening up. The IDB would be in a position to step up its assistance significantly under the solidarity fund which it has mobilised. Already, a substantial amount of this fund has been pledged for Bangladesh. But making good and timely use of the resources to be made available by the IDB, will depend on efficient implementation of projects.

Honouring people's verdict

Maswood Alam Khan

In future there may be two general knowledge quizzes in our school textbooks: "Who was the first leader in Bangladesh who accepted his or her victory with humility? And "Who was the first leader in Bangladesh who accepted his or her defeat with grace?" Any or both the names of our two prominent leaders---Begum Khaleda Zia and Sheikh Hasina Wazid---may be the answer to either of these two quizzes, if only our political leaders have a thirst to enter history on the eve of the New Year 2009!

Bangladeshis are going to cast their votes on Monday to elect their representatives as lawmakers for the country's ninth parliament. About 1500 candidates are now claiming themselves as leaders of our nation and will humbly solicit support from more than 81 million voters; of whom a little more than 50 percent are females and 31 percent are young. Among the eligible voters a few millions will be casting their votes for the first time in their life.

Out of 1500 candidates 1200 will have to embrace defeat and 300 will be crowned with victory. Out of 81 million voters many millions will be elated at the election results and the rest will feel utterly desolate. A game between two sets of people will be over at 8 in the evening on Monday.

The next morning two states of mind---a state of euphoria and a state of shock---will prevail among people of Bangladesh. Those who will be victorious will be celebrating their achievements with all the pomp and those who will be defeated will remain sunken in gloom for several days.

The media will be publishing and airing election results in graphical representations with analyses from different points of view. There will be arguments for and against the analyses. There will be bitter accusations against those who misled voters or negatively influenced the election results through deceits.

But there will be not a single item of news in any media---I am pretty sure---on what a heavy toll this election would be taking on the health of our populace. Nobody will ever know how many people, who would fail to adjust with their unexpected results, would die of cardiac failure or become terminally sick in the aftermath of the election.

A man after a frenzy of excitements becomes too weak to withstand a failure when he has to give up the chase for victory; he in the process curtails his life longevity if he was too obsessed with the race.

The man who snatches victory equally curtails the length of his age if he does not know the art of controlling excessive euphoria by wrapping his elation with a cover of humility. Arrogance fuelled by hubris corrodes life.

We will be doing justice to our health if we, after an election or a game, immediately and enthusiastically shake our opponent's hand and say something nice, avoid making excuses for our loss.

There are many reasons for outcome; it is better to direct focus on our opponent's strengths that day rather than on our own shortcomings. We should reinterpret a loss as a free lesson rather than failure.

Novelist Margaret Halsey said: "In some circumstances, the refusal to be defeated is a refusal to be educated."

A refusal to be defeated does not necessarily mean a refusal to admit making a mistake or losing a battle. It can mean working hard to direct the blame toward someone else rather than to oneself.

Only when we admit (at least to ourselves) that we have gone dreadfully wrong, made a bad mistake or clearly picked the wrong choice can we assess when the problem began and learn from it so that the problem will not happen again.

Much of life is wasted by people who insist upon refusing to admit that they have made a mistake. They spend a huge amount of time, effort and money gathering evidence to show that they did not make a mistake. Later in their lives they often find themselves in a dead end. It's a dead end they built for themselves.

Defeat is not a bad thing if we use it as a stepping stone to gain experience and wisdom. There are certain potential advantages to losing and some unexpected blessings that may come by way of defeat, especially given a sufficiently attentive social environment. It may require a stunning failure or defeat in one area of one's life to enable him to turn his attention to some other area that will have more enduring interest and appeal.

American author William Arthur Ward said: "To bear defeat with dignity, to accept criticism with poise, to receive honors with humility---these are marks of maturity and graciousness."

We live our lives, we wear out, we croak. We sink into oblivion with our departure from this world. People remember us for at best a day or two after we pass away. In spite of ourselves we cannot live longer than we are destined to. Ageing and then death is as inevitable as sunrise and then sunset. We are normal mortals.

But among us there are people who are immortals. They stand taller and see farther than the rest. They dedicate their life to occupy a place among the immortals gloriously registered in the pages of history. Their immortality is attributed to their extraordinary ability in achieving feats ordinary 'we' cannot afford. They are the heroes. They are the visionaries. They are our leaders. We vote for them.

A leader is one who leads his or her followers. A leader is one who leaves examples for future leaders to replicate. A leader is one who leaves behind memorable statements.

A refreshing change will be represented in our politics if any of our major political leaders in the morning of 30th December declares: "We accept the results with an open heart and will sit on the opposition benches."

Such a declaration would herald a huge shift from the past when in previous elections the losing party has usually leveled bitter accusations of poll-rigging and outside interference to explain their defeat.

And the leader who would be victorious in this election would register her name on a page of our history if she blends a little tinge of humility in her victory speech: "My dear countrymen! Listen to me, please. The leader who is going to sit on the opposition bench of our parliament is more virtuous than me in many fields and we have many a lesson to learn from her varied experiences. We need her as a copilot for our journey ahead."

If there were an essay contest to make a draft concession speech for our future opposition leader I wish I could pen the following lines:

"Our people have made their choice and have selected Mrs X and her XYZ party as the instruments to fulfill their will for the next five years. The people have given their verdict, and I gladly honor it.

The majority of our people have rallied behind Mrs. X and her party. People have firmly believed her promises. Her qualities have now to be exclusively invested in leading us.

From the core of my heart I pay my gratitude to all my party supporters who campaigned day and night to see us victorious. Now I earnestly urge them all to give Mrs. X all the support she will need to carry out the heavy tasks that lie before her. I hereby guarantee my wholehearted support to her and give her my and my party's unalloyed assurance that under no circumstances we will allow the growth of our nation to retard. We will not call "HARTAL". What instead we will do is watch her from the opposition bench of our sacred parliament not necessarily to only oppose her but also to wake her up if she ever unmindfully sleeps on her commitments she had pledged to our nation.

We have to remain vigilantly united for attaining what our valiant freedom fighters had dreamt about.

The dream of our freedom fighters that united us as Bangladeshi citizens is far greater than the election contest that has divided us as political parties. We were not enemies, we were mere opponents. We vote as many, but we dream as one. With faith in democracy we will move forward to reach our cherished goal of a prosperous Bangladesh. May Allah guide us all!"

If any of our leaders exhibits such magnanimity in accepting her defeat her name will be engraved in history books in bold letters made of gold with platinum rims!

On hearing such an emotive speech from one of our illustrious leaders conceding defeat with such a grace many of us will be feeling our hearts pounding our chests and the majority of our people will be making their minds to elect her as the next prime minister, if the next party in power fails to deliver what they have promised.

Shooting shoes, sleeping dogs

Aijaz Zaka Syed

A ponderous academic debate has broken out over the shoe-ting incident involving US President George W Bush. After the initial shock and awe that the rage of Montader al Zaidi brought out in all of us, just about everyone in the Middle East -- including fellow journalists and writers -- is furiously debating if the Iraqi journalist was right to throw those size 10 shoes at the world's most powerful man.

Some of these well meaning voices have perhaps rightly argued that throwing shoes at guests does not go well with the Arab and Islamic tradition of honoring one's guests. But I am not so sure.

Call me a cynic but I find this talk of great Arab and Islamic traditions in relation to the leaders of the coalition of the willing a little absurd after what they have visited on the Arab and Muslim world.

Recall those searing images from the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq -- that heap of naked bodies, grown up men cowering like terrified kids with hungry dogs on their heels and then let's ask ourselves if that shoe slur was appropriate or not.

Even as some of us feel chucking shoes at visiting heads of state is not the most ideal form of journalism or registering one's protest, you've got to concede that even a million pair of shoes cannot ever recompense for what the people of Iraq have undergone under the US occupation.

Even as a lame duck president was busy dodging shoes in Baghdad last week, a report by the US Senate's Armed Services Committee stunned the Americans by revealing that the top administration officials including the president himself were not only aware of the widespread human rights abuses and torture over the past eight years but sanctioned them.

The Senate bipartisan report concludes that the Abu Ghraib abuse was not just the result of a few rogue soldiers: "Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld's authorization of aggressive interrogation techniques and subsequent interrogation policies and plans approved by senior military and civilian officials conveyed the message that physical pressures and degradation were appropriate treatment for detainees in US military custody."

The Senate report outlines how Rumsfeld and other top officials rejected warnings from the Pentagon's own lawyers that torture and abuse were not only against the US and international law, they were also strategic blunders of the first order.

So from the abuse of detainees in the US prisons in Iraq and Afghanistan to the persecution of hundreds of faceless prisoners at the Guantanamo Bay camp in Cuba for seven years to CIA's inventive torture methods and abduction of innocent, helpless people from around the world, the corruption went right up to the top.

The Senate report, which has been largely ignored by a media weary of war and preoccupied with falling markets and failing auto giants, traces the Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay crimes right back to the Pentagon, to the defense secretary and to the president himself. They cannot be explained as solitary actions of a few 'bad apples.' Seems the whole basket had gone to rot.

To give this administration its due, it's not exactly bending over backwards to 'explain' or apologize for all that has been going on over the past eight years.

In his interviews with ABC and Fox News over the past week, Vice-President Dick Cheney has magnanimously acknowledged he personally sanctioned all the controversial policies of this administration -- from the torture of detainees to CIA's rendition flights that picked up 'usual suspects' from around the world without the knowledge of their families and governments to dump them down the bottomless holes like the Gitmo.

The man described as the "most dangerous Vice-President in the US history" by the incoming vice-president Joe Biden is far from apologetic about this legacy. In fact, he has the audacity to call for keeping the Guantanamo Bay gulag open as long as the US war of terror is on. Which of course he wants the US to wage as long as it takes.

Asked whether waterboarding, CIA's now legendary way of getting to know its victims, was an appropriate technique of interrogation, the reclusive man rightly seen as the real power behind the throne, said with a straight face: 'I do'.

Faced with this intransigence, do you really think the Arabs should be embarrassed or apologetic over the actions of a lone Iraqi journalist who for years watched and experienced firsthand the incredible "blessings of democracy and free society" gifted by Bush and company talk about and couldn't take it anymore? Especially when there's little hope or possibility of any retribution whatsoever for those who visited these appalling crimes on the people of Iraq and Afghanistan!

In fact, there's talk of Bush possibly handing out blanket pardons providing immunity to those responsible for bringing shame and disgrace to America discrediting it in the eyes of the world. If that is done, it would not just be a travesty of justice but an outrage against America's own ideals and values that are enshrined in its Constitution and admired by the rest of the world.

When the Americans overwhelmingly voted for a "skinny black guy with a funny name" in the historic presidential elections last month, the world celebrated with them.

Because in choosing a black man for the White House, son of a Kenyan Muslim father at that, the Americans seemed to vote for a better world and change in every sense of the word. A world decidedly and starkly different from the one represented by the Bushes and Cheneys. A world inspired by hope and based on justice, fair play and mutual respect.

I know the incoming administration of Barack Obama will have its hands full what with the mind-boggling mess that his predecessor leaves behind on all fronts, chiefly on economic front.

In all likelihood, the Democrats would be loath to disturb the ghosts of the Republican past.

But if America really wants to move on from the neocon legacy and reclaim its standing in the world as the great democracy that it once was, it will have to hold to account all those who sent a million people to their deaths and destroyed a great civilisation for nothing.

Bush might have successfully dodged those wayward Iraqi shoes -- he's a great dodger, you've got to give it to him! - but those who gave the world Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay and invented words like 'waterboarding' and 'extraordinary rendition' should not be allowed to escape accountability. Now is not the time to let sleeping dogs lie.