[sacw] sacw dispatch #1 (29 Oct.99)

[Harsh Kapoor]

South Asia Citizens Web Dispatch #1.
29 October 1999
_________________
#1. The "Untouchable" general from Bangladesh & my BTV days
#2. Foreign Funding of NGO's in India
_________________
#1.

News From Bangladesh
October 26, 1999
Commentary

The "Untouchable" General From Bangladesh and My BTV Days
Anatomy of A Martial Law In Bangladesh
By Jamal Hasan

Hasina Wazed won a rather precarious majority in the last election.
Nevertheless, quite a few eyebrows were raised when she sought out Gen.
Ershad's support to boost her majority in the parliament. And Ershad, whohad
languished in jail under the Khaleda Zia administration, was only too eager
to oblige. Politics can indeed make strange bedfellows. The alliance between
Hasina and Ershad made it that much easier to form a government that enjoyed
a comfortable majority in the parliament.

Two facts stood out in the aftermath of the opportunistic alliance. Firstly,
Hasina Wazed had befriended the General who was number one in Khaleda Zia's
list of enemies -- an outcome of the principle that deems the enemy's enemy
to be one's natural friend. Secondly, Hasina Wazed made it clear by her
action that she deems gratitude to be a dispensable virtue in the realm of
politics. After all, Awami League could never have forced the ouster of the
Ershad regime without the Bangladesh Nationalist Party's active support.

Since then, events have turned a full circle. Today, General Ershad is
cozying up to Khaleda Zia who, in her turn, is reciprocating with positive
overtures. Anything seems to be possible in Bangladeshi politics these days.
The General is now in the enviable position of determining which of the two
ladies enjoys the upper hand in Bangladeshi politics. In that sense, he
truly is a "queen maker."

General Hussain Mohammed Ershad had the foresight to cultivate friends in
positions of power and influence. Thus, in USA, he befriended politicians
all across the ideological spectrum. The General continues to be in the good
books of politicians like Senator Dave Durenberger at one end of the
ideological spectrum to Congressman Stephen Solarz (once Chairman of House
=46oreign Affairs Committee) who is definitely at the opposite end of the
spectrum. With friends in high places, it is no surprise that the Khaleda
Zia administration had found it so difficult to convict the General of any
crime.

General Ershad had come to power in a bloodless coup in the last week of
March of 1982. The democratically elected government of Abdus Sattar had
been deposed quite unceremoniously. The deposed President (Abdus Sattar) was
treated quite shabbily by the General who had the dubious distinction to be
a poet and a gentleman.' The ousted President, who was not in the best of
health at the time of his ouster, was forced to live in seclusion until he
died.

General Ershad has ruled the longest in the history of Bangladesh (March
1982-December 1990). He was ultimately driven out of power by a mass
upheaval. The General's regime undoubtedly stands out as the most corrupt in
Bangladeshi history. I shall provide some glimpses into life under General
Ershad from my experiences as a lowly news producer for BTV.

The short-lived government under Justice Sattar remains to this day the best
instance of good and responsible governance in Bangladesh. At the time, I
had been working with Bangladesh Television as a news producer. I recall
sandbags installed around the compound of the Bangladesh Television Station
after Bangabandhu's assassination. The sandbags remained in place during the
entire period of "Martial Democracy" under General Zia. When Sattar was
elected to head a democratic government, the soldiers were withdrawn but the
sandbags remained in place to testify silently the culture of the time. I
always wondered if the bags would ever be of use someday. The question in my
mind was answered loudly and clearly when General Ershad stepped out of the
confine of Kurmitola on 24 March 1982 to proclaim himself the chief
executive of Bangladesh a la Ziaur Rahman. I surmised it was d=C8j=FD vu all
over again!

General Ershad could have come to power much earlier right after the murder
of General Zia. But he was shrewd enough to bide his time. He had correctly
assessed that an immediate usurpation of power after the ghastly murder of a
popular General would have turned him into a villain in no time. General
Ershad was indeed wise to be patient.

General Ershad developed an antipathy toward employees of BTV in general and
of those who worked in the news department, in particular. BTV had failed to
cover the General to his satisfaction. The fiasco during the Sattar era at
the Shahid Minar on 21 February had been the last straw. BTV's cameras had
failed to zoom in on the General even once. Needless to say, the General was
livid with rage. But fortunately no heads had rolled at BTV for the lapse.

The last week of March of 1982 was a period of high tension. The cantonment
was exerting tremendous pressure on the government. By 23 March, employees
of all vital agencies of the government had come to sense ominous signals.
The TV building was full of strangers -- plain-clothes men with unusually
short hair. The most dangerous moment in the unfolding drama was undoubtedly
when civilian administrators in the defence ministry became aware of the
impending coup. By late evening all staffer of BTV had also become aware of
what was about to happen. A senior bureaucrat at the defence ministry could
no longer stand the suspense and phoned General Ershad to ascertain whether
there was any truth to the rumors. You may rest assured the General was not
the least bit amused by the query. The bureaucrat must have thanked his
stars when he realized that his life would be spared. But I am most certain
that he learned the lesson of his lifetime.

The TV news team were "alerted" to be on stand by. Ershad brought in his
team at midnight and got his speech recorded. The morning saw him posing as
the "savior of the nation."

The initial days of Ershad regime lived by rule of the "boots." The official
bus of the night crew of the TV news team had to stop at every roadblock you
may think of. The newsmen would be harassed again and again often under
petty pretexts. One senior newsman commented, "Even the Pak soldiers under
General Yahya Khan were more civil to the television crew in occupied Dacca
of 1971." General Ershad had succeeded in turning the television building
into a mini cantonment.

The staff members at the television station had to show their identity cards
at army checkpoints before they were allowed into the TV building. One
morning as I was entering the TV building, I saw a jawan sitting at a table
near the gate. My identity card was in my left pocket. Without much thought,
I put my left hand into my pocket to get the card out. At once, I realized
that I had committed a blunder. I tried my best to make up for the blunder
by presenting my card to the jawan at the table. But he was not to be
mollified so easily. The jawan told me rudely, "Don't you know that by using
your left hand you have insulted the Martial Law authority and that you may
be sentenced to fourteen years of jail?" I was seething with rage on the
inside. Fortunately, I had the good sense of not to display it outwardly. I
looked the jawan in his eyes and said, "I did not intend to insult the
authority but if you take it that way, I apologize." That gesture worked and
the jawan told me with an ostentatious touch of magnanimity, "Okay, this
time I will let you go, but don't ever do it again."

Ershad deputed a young army major to manage the TV station. He never minced
his words to convey to us that he was the boss. In his very first meeting
with senior members of the staff, he made it clear by saying, "You may call
me either Major so and so or sir, but never ever call me mister so and so."
That meeting set the tone for the future as the civilian officers realized
that they were in for a long haul.

Before every news telecast, the producers had to go to men in uniform for
clearance. The soldiers in charge were mostly young army officers. It was a
Captain or even a Lieutenant who had the ultimate authority to decide what
would and what would not go on air. This was indeed quite humiliating for
all veteran television journalists. I, too, did my turns to get approval for
my news stories from these newly ordained "News Chiefs" imported from the
cantonment. It was never a pleasant experience but I somehow managed to keep
out of mischief.

In any Third World country under military rule, the civilians are always
treated as a "Second Class Citizens." Even the lowliest soldier would take
pride in recalling the misdeeds of the civilian rulers of the past and pour
scorn at every opportunity on "those bloody civilians." As a news producer
for BTV, I had more than my fair share of encounters with the enforcers of
military rules. Naturally, I never suffered the illusion that civilian
employees can ever expect fairness or even civil behavior from their
military bosses as a matter of right.

As a TV newsman, I had the opportunity to "rub shoulders" with the high and
mighty. For example, it was quite a heady experience for me to fly with the
Naval Chief or the Air Force Chief in the same helicopter. The flight might
sometimes lead us to the outskirts of Dhaka or sometimes as far away as
Comilla or Barisal. Through first hand experience, I realized that the
Deputy Chief Martial Law Administrators (DCMLA's) wielded tremendous power.
It was truly a revelation every time I covered their meetings with local
level administrators. The bosses in the military regime were literally
oozing with revolutionary zeal!

It goes without saying TV staff members were not particularly fond of the
army officers who had usurped the boss's chair in the TV studio. There was
little that the TV newsmen could do to vent their unhappiness and
frustration. One time a television production assistant was detained and
manhandled by some soldiers because he had refused them to entry into the
studio when a recording was in progress. That was like the last straw. It
took "mediation" from higher-ranking military officers to calm the
situation.

On another occasion, a civilian security officer of the television was
prosecuted under Martial Law. We heard that he was sentenced to fourteen
years of imprisonment for the "offense" of arguing with a non --commissioned
officer. That, apparently, was tantamount to dishonoring the Martial Law
authority. I also learnt that I wasn't the only employee to have incurred
the wrath of jawans for the crime of showing "identity card on left hand."
In fact, a news producer was detained for a few hours for that crime and
humiliated in public.

The raison d'=CDtre for the Ershad coup, like that of most military coups, w=
as
eradication of corruption. Some former ministers from the BNP era were
indeed arrested. Saifur Rahman and Tanvir Ahmed Siddiqui were among them. I
had a chance to visit a military court. The courts were presided by a group
of five military officers who acted as Judges. It was not quite what you
would expect in a court of law in America. There was no need for consensus
about the judgment and so the majority opinion prevailed. In one of the high
profile cases, the dissenting voice came from a young air force officer who
opted for capital punishment for the accused, a minister from BNP era.

The officer in charge of the television complex had his own unique style of
diffusing tension. One time a neighborhood family came to the major with a
complaint against some of his jawans. The man and his wife complained that
some of the soldiers were constantly taunting and harassing their daughters.
The major said point blank that he could not take any action against the
jawans. However, he suggested a solution. He advised the couple to bar their
daughters from visiting any place where they would be in full view of the
soldiers.

One incidence in the TV building sent shivers down the spine of all staff
members of BTV. A group of officers descended on the TV production booth.
They arrested the producer of a popular children's program. He was
handcuffed and led out in full view of his colleagues. Apparently, someone
had lodged a complaint with the martial law authority that the producer was
guilty of misappropriating production funds. The producer was dragged to the
Suhrawardy Udyan processing center in handcuffs where he was detained for an
indefinite period.
General Ershad had one important difference with General Zia in the matter
of exercising power. General Ershad did not insist on enjoying a monopoly
over power. He was willing to share power with other important members of
the junta. In addition, his coup was not planned in the secrecy that is the
hallmark of most military coups. In an interview with the New York Times in
1982, the general said very frankly that he had alerted most of the major
embassies in Dhaka well ahead of the coup about his intentions and plans.

I got my chance to "rub shoulders" with the General in the course of my
duties as a news producer. It was probably a week after the coup. I was
assigned to cover General Ershad's golfing moments within the cantonment
area. I arrived on time with my camera crew. I was warned about the fiasco
at Shahid Minar on 21 February when cameras had failed to zoom in on the
General. This time I made sure that my cameras don't fail to do the needful.

The general did not look worried at all. The golf course was full of foreign
diplomats. Probably it was deemed an ideal spot to glean information from
and compare notes with the wheelers and dealers of the world. My cameraman
was dutifully following the general. I was writing my story while sitting on
a sofa in a chateau by the golf course. There was an abundance of beverages.
=46oreign guests had come to the chateau to have a sip. The General would jo=
in
them every now and then. And every time he arrived at the chateau I would
rise to pay obeisance. However, one time, he stood right next to where I was
sitting on the sofa to chat with a foreign acquaintance. In that setting, I
felt very awkward about standing up again. I kept looking down and praying,
"Dharani Tumi Didha Hao!" Fortunately, the General did not pay much
attention to the "uncivil" civil servant and no one took me to task for
showing disrespect toward the Supremo Generalissimo - La Petite Dictator of
Bangladesh.

As I watched the most powerful man in Bangladesh at close range on that day,
I said to myself, "This guy's fate will not be like Zia's." Later on I
repeated my thoughts to my colleagues. History proved me correct. The
General ultimately became the untouchable.

Today, I work at a U.S. federal facility dealing with law enforcement. Every
day I come to the main gate with a badge hanging down my neck. And once in a
while I recall an incident that took place some 18 years ago when I got into
trouble with the "law" for getting the identity card out of my pocket with
my left hand. And I smile to myself even as I thank my stars that my native
land is now free from the peril of being ruled by army dictatorship.
Nevertheless, the recent political debacle in Pakistan makes me queasy. I
hope Bangladesh's military will not get ideas from Pakistani military's
recent misadventure into politics. Let us give democracy a chance to
flourish in Bangladesh. After all, military rule always engenders oligarchy,
which Bangladesh could least afford at this crossroad of a new millennium.

(Jamal Hasan writes from Washington, DC. His email address: poplu@h...=
m)
_________________
#2.
The Hindu
29 October 1999
Op-Ed.

=46oreign funding of NGOs [in India]
By Kuldip Nayar

ON PRINCIPLE, I am against foreign funding of non-governmental
organisations (NGOs). It defeats self-reliance and sometimes brings in
factors which give them a bad name. But nearly 90 per cent of the
organisations are dependent on sources from abroad. And all of them have
not done badly. Some organisations are doing a wonderful job and have
improved things at the grass roots. Even the National Human Rights
Commission (NHRC) has recognised the service rendered by many.

Since the funding comes through a recognised bank after the Home
Minister's permission has been obtained, it is but expected that its use
should be for the purposes indicated by the organisation concerned.
Neither the Government nor the recipients should have any right to make
the funding a political issue. Such a step maligns the movement and
creates a doubt whether the work done is altruistic in purpose.

By issuing a show-cause notice to some 25 NGOs, the Home Ministry has
played politics. It has picked on those which are engaged in combating
communalism and strengthening secularism. They should be taken to task
if they have misused funds. But their job is to inculcate a spirit of
accommodation in the country and fight parochialism. The work is
difficult to quantify. Even then one would not have questioned the
motive of the Ministry had the notice gone to the organisation sowing
the seeds of fundamentalism. Some members of the RSS parivar are
receiving money from America, Great Britain and other countries. They
have not been asked to render accounts. The money which came in the name
of bricks for the Ram temple before the demolition of the Babri Masjid
runs into crores.

True, questioning the misuse by some NGOs is no justification for
questioning those which have done their business quietly. But when the
assessment is arbitrary, the Home Ministry's action will become suspect.
Let there be an inquiry into all and there must be some norms. In fact,
some outside agency should scrutinise accounts as well as allegations.
The Government is not an independent, objective body. Since the days of
Indira Gandhi, it has acquired a colouring, of preferences and
prejudices. The job should be entrusted to the NHRC.

Besides the NGOs, MPs suffer from a cranky rule. They have to seek the
Home Ministry's permission before accepting an invitation from abroad.
Its specific instructions are that a member cannot leave India before he
or she gets sanction. I can appreciate the government concern over
spurious invitations. But why can't a list of organisations with no
worthy credentials be circulated to the members from time to time? They
will themselves say `no' to the blacklisted set-ups. It is humiliating
for the members to apply and wait for acceptance or rejection of their
application.

I once wrote to the Home Minister, Mr. L. K. Advani, about it. My
argument was that the Government, which is headed by a political party,
should not sit in judgment on the MPs accepting invitations to go
abroad. His reply was that it was not his doing; the Foreign Exchange
Regulation Act has made such a provision. The Act needs to be amended.
The people's representatives should not be asked to cool their heels
until permission is granted, in a process at the level of a section
officer.

An organisation, which was okay yesterday might not be so today and
vice-versa. I know the working of the Home Ministry as I was its press
officer for 10 years. The list of undesirable organisations included
some Hindu fundamentalist groups when the Congress was in power. Now the
axe must have fallen on the leftist set-ups. The procedure is wrong. The
list of undesirable organisations should be published in a gazette. The
Government should show transparency in such matters.

* * *

The case of Christians is more serious than violation of human rights.
The manner in which some of them have been attacked in certain parts of
India reflects a pre-meditated design to frighten, if not persecute, the
community. That the organisations or groups responsible for picking on
the Christians are directly or indirectly connected with the ruling BJP
is all the more frightening.

Their hate-campaign has created a climate in which it is considered
legitimate by Hindu fundamentalists to `punish' anyone from among the
missionaries for their `proselytising activities'. The Centre's claim to
protect the minorities will carry no conviction if the culprits are not
brought to book immediately. The murderer of a foreign missionary in
Orissa is still at large. The Home Ministry wins only a debating point
when it says the Congress Government in the State has failed to trace
criminals like Dara Singh. True, but what has the Centre done about it?
Has it no responsibility in the case?

The murder of a person belonging to the minority communities is, in
fact, a federal crime. The Constitution puts a special responsibility on
the Centre to protect the minorities. It cannot let the matter rest at
the stage it is: for the State to trace the guilty and prosecute them if
apprehended. Perhaps the Home Ministry could consider constituting a
police force for pursuing cases involved federal crimes. America has
such a force. It investigates the atrocities committed against the
blacks and brings the cases before courts. The Christians and the
Muslims, who constitute the biggest minority in the country, would feel
confident and secure if there is a federal police to take up their case.

Had there been such a provision, the Provincial Armed Constabulary (PAC)
of Uttar Pradesh would have been punished for the murders at Hashimpura,
Meerut. The force arrested several hundred Muslims during the communal
riots on May 22 and 23, 1987. A few days later 50 bodies were found
floating in the Upper Ganga Canal. The case is still pending before the
Lucknow bench.

* * *

The Refuge[e] Watch, a publication by South Asia Forum for Human Rights,
says in its latest issue that the mass exodus of Pandits from the
Kashmir Valley in 1990 has become a point of propaganda in India and
Pakistan. It sadly points out that ``people who had grown up in a
culture of social and economic interdependence have been communalised.''
The publication goes on to say: ``The poison of communal politics had
constructed negative images of the Pandit as abandoning his Muslim
brethren to the guns of the Indian state and the Muslim as waiting to
grab the property of his Pandit neighbour.''

The presumption is that the Pandits can and must return, irrespective of
the transformation of the ``homeland''. It is understandable why this
course is the best way out. But so long as Kashmir does not return to
its old ethos of Sufism and secularism, there will be no question of the
Pandits returning to the Valley. Pakistan's daily interference through
terrorists is making things still more complicated.

I wish secular forces had come together in Kashmir to fight increasing
fundamentalism. But if the allegations of `rigging' and manipulating the
polls in the Valley are true, how can secular forces join hands? The
issue becomes different: whether democracy has one meaning in Kashmir
and another in the rest of India? The two persons who made allegations
of rigging are the former Union Ministers, Mufti Mohammed Sayeed and
Prof. Saifuddin Soz. Their complaints cannot be ignored.

While on Kashmir, it is sad to find that the TADA, removed in the rest
of India some five years ago, is still applicable in the State. It is a
draconian Act, making a mockery of civil and human rights. If some are
guilty, they should be tried in an open court. The use of the TADA gives
one the feeling that the administration does not have a case against the
detainees but wants them to know that Government can be arbitrary,
prejudiced and dictatorial.

____________________________________________
SOUTH ASIA CITIZENS WEB DISPATCH is an informal, independent &
non-profit citizens wire service run by South Asia Citizens Web
(http://www.mnet.fr/aiindex) since1996.