Democracy vs.Terrorism In Bangladesh

Democracy vs. Terrorism in Bangladesh

In Bangladesh increasing tide of political violence that has moved out frequently.  Still it is potential threat, by fundamentalist Islamist groups which rise last one decade. Islamic terrorism is the drawback for any country to move forward. Bangladesh is likely to act terrorism to neighboring India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. Bangladesh is the second look as Islamic fundamentalist in south Asia. As a third Muslim country in the world Bangladesh has continued a democratic practice since liberty even it ranked the poorest country in the world. The majority Muslims are Sunni. While the democratic practice is going well the country has threatened by an intensifying tide of fundamental Islamist groups. By increasing the radicalized violence the country is struggling to continue to do the democratic practice. By means the international communities to deny help the country to develop. As statistics says for radical Islamist groups in south Asia Bangladesh is the safe haven. The main political parties are using those fundamentalist Islamic groups to create violence. The media and the individual speech are strongly opposite of all the terrorist groups in Bangladesh. By encouraging the main political parties, media and other social network that are increasingly being targeted by terrorist organization.

Hefazat-e-Islami, a coalition of teachers and students associated with radical madrasas and with Jamaat-e-Islami, launched a counter-protest, vandalizing vehicles and clashing with police in cities throughout the country protest against the government. Some terrorist groups are not funded directly they are inspired by extremism organization. In 2005 the series bomb attack across the country killed and wounded people. One terrorist group named Jamatul Mujahideen Bangladesh which has been linked to al – Qaeda. Other group named, Ansarullah Bangla Team, took responsible to kill the atheist blogger Avijit Roy in Feb 2015. This atheist blogger was hacked to death on the street of Dhaka city.

The international community ignores the rapidly rising terrorism violence in Bangladesh which is their own risk.  The sensible, secular-oriented fundamentals of society and traditional Islamists are battling it out over conceptions of the role of faith in politics and society. The progressive voices are gone down by the threat of fundamentalist groups. The international communities are very tense about the rising of terrorism group inside the country. The international community is now comparing Bangladesh is the high risk country like Afghanistan, Pakistan, and India. Recently two foreigners were killed one is Japans and other one is Italian nationalist. The recent arrest of quite a few men accused of recruiting for ISIS and Al Qaeda terrorist groups.

Bangladesh is a significant form for a democratic Islamic state, which could serve as an optimistic force and a powerful model across the Islamic world. The human right violations are seriously committed by the state security force which engaged extra judicial killing, disappearances and severe torture against government opponents.In country and the international Policymakers should give a hand the Bangladeshi government in its efforts to crack down on terrorist group. The recent attack of all blogger is the big risk of the government because they those group working through smaller splinter cells and engaging in person and lone type attacks. The government should build to deal with those sophisticated attacks. The counter-terrorism and highly trained force should build to defeat and discourage them to continue this root.

The blogger voices have been quiet by attacks of the fundamental groups. The number of atheist blogger has been murdered in 2015 and more than eighty blogger are under threat of Islamist groups. Those groups are divided between the true religion practices, freedom of speech, democracy and the society. The radical voice and the brain washed terrorist groups are the big threat of Bangladeshi democracy and the democratic practice. It is high time for the government to provide security the moderate voice which is under threat, also ban all the terrorist groups. The government should take an ongoing conversation about the role of religion in the society and politics.

Anayet khan

London,UK

28-01-2016

Political crisis after 5 january general election in Bangladesh

After 5 January 2014 elections, the most violent in Bangladesh’s history, clashes between government and opposition groups led to several deaths and scores injured. The confrontation marks a new phase of the deadlock between the ruling Awami League (AL) and the Bangladesh National Party (BNP) opposition, which have swapped time in government with metronomic consistency since independence. Having boycotted the 2014 poll, the BNP appears bent on ousting the government via street power. With daily violence at the pre-election level, the political crisis is fast approaching the point of no return and could gravely destabilise Bangladesh unless the sides move urgently to reduce tensions. Moreover, tribunals set up to adjudicate crimes perpetrated at the moment of Bangladesh’s bloody birth threaten division more than reconciliation. Both parties would be best served by changing course: the AL government by respecting the democratic right to dissent (recalling its time in opposition); the BNP by reviving its political fortunes through compromise with the ruling party, rather than violent street politics.

With the two largest mainstream parties unwilling to work toward a new political compact that respects the rights of both opposition and victor to govern within the rule of law, extremists and criminal networks could exploit the resulting political void. Violent Islamist factions are already reviving, threatening the secular, democratic order. While jihadi forces see both parties as the main hurdle to the establishment of an Islamic order, the AL and the BNP perceive each other as the main adversary.

The AL and its leader, Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, emphasise that the absence from parliament of former Prime Minister Khaleda Zia and her BNP make them political non-entities. Yet, concerned about a comeback, the government is attempting to forcibly neutralise the political opposition and stifle dissent, including by bringing corruption and other criminal cases against party leaders, among whom are Zia and her son and heir apparent, Tarique Rahman; heavy-handed use of police and paramilitary forces; and legislation and policies that undermine fundamental constitutional rights.

The BNP, which has not accepted any responsibility for the election-related violence in 2014 that left hundreds dead (and saw hundreds of Hindu homes and shops vandalised), is again attempting to oust the government by force, in alliance with the Jamaat-e-Islami, which is alleged to have committed some of the worst abuses during that period. The party retains its core supporters and seems to have successfully mobilised its activists on the streets. Yet, its sole demand – for a fresh election under a neutral caretaker – is too narrow to generate the public support it needs to overcome the disadvantage of being out of parliament, and its political capital is fading fast as it again resorts to violence. 

The deep animosity and mistrust between leaders and parties were not inevitable. Despite a turbulent history, they earlier cooperated to end direct or indirect military rule and strengthen democracy, most recently during the 2007-2008 tenure of the military-backed caretaker government (CTG), when the high command tried to remove both Sheikh Hasina and Khaleda Zia from politics. Rather than building on that cooperation, the two leaders have resorted to non-democratic methods to undermine each other. In power, both have used centralised authority, a politicised judiciary and predatory law enforcement agencies against legitimate opposition.

Underpinning the current crisis is the failure to agree on basic standards for multiparty democratic functioning. While the BNP claims to be the guardian of Bangladeshi nationalism, the AL has attempted to depict itself as the sole author and custodian of Bangladesh’s liberation. The International Crimes Tribunal (ICT), established by the AL in March 2010 to prosecute individuals accused of committing atrocities during the 1971 liberation war, should be assessed in this context. While the quest to bring perpetrators to account is justifiable, the ICTs are not simply, or even primarily, a legal tool, but rather are widely perceived as a political one, primarily for use against the government’s Islamist opposition. In short, the governing AL is seen to be using the nation’s founding tragedy for self-serving political gains.

The AL needs to realise that the BNP’s marginalisation from mainstream politics could encourage anti-government activism to find more radical avenues, all the more so in light of its own increasingly authoritarian bent. Equally, the BNP would do well to abandon its alliances of convenience with violent Islamist groups and seek to revive agreement on a set of basic standards for multiparty democracy. A protracted and violent political crisis would leave Sheikh Hasina and Khaleda Zia the ultimate losers, particularly if a major breakdown of law and order were to encourage the military to intervene; though there is as yet no sign of that, history suggests it is an eventuality not to be dismissed. The opportunities for political reconciliation are fast diminishing, as political battle lines become ever more entrenched. Both parties should restrain their violent activist base and take practical steps to reduce political tensions:

• the AL government have to carry out to a non-repressive reply to political dispute, restraint in and ensure responsibility for abuses devoted by law enforcement entities, overturn way that restrain general liberties and aggressively defend marginal communities beside do violence to and lack of properties and businesses;
•  AL should invite the BNP, at subordinate levels of position if needed, to talks intended at reviving the democratic system of the game, as well as electoral reorganization. It also hold mayoral elections in Dhaka, a long-overdue legal obligation to present opportunities to commence that discussion; and
•  BNP should carry out to peaceful political resistance; refrain from an coalition with  Jamaat-e-Islami which is attractive the Islamist opposition’s street control with slight supporting come back for the BNP; and in its place show enthusiasm to take on in significant discussions with  AL to end this political crisis to destabilization financial development and hostile to undermine the political instruct.
  
  
  Anayet khan / From UK / 07-01-2016