& çâÌæÚUæð´ ·¤è ¥ôÚU Îð¹Ùæ ÁæÚUè ÚU¹ð´ ¥ÍæüÌ ¥ÂÙð ÜÿØ ÂÚU ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´Ð ãæÚU Ù ×æÙð´, €UØô´ç·¤ ·¤æ× ·¤ÚUÙð âð ¥æÂ·¤ô ©gðàØ ·¤è Âýæç# ãôÌè ãñ ¥õÚU ÁèßÙ ·¤æ ¹æÜèÂÙ ÎêÚU ãôÌæ ãñÐ ÖÜð ãè ÁèßÙ ×ð´ ç·¤ÌÙè Öè ·¤çÆÙæ§ü €UØô´ Ù ¥æ°, çÁ™ææâæ ¥õÚU ©ˆâæã ÕÙæ° ÚU¹ð´Ð ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´, ÜÿØ ã×ðàææ ¥æÂ·Ô¤ Âæâ ãôÌð ãñ´ çÁ‹ãð´ ÂæÙð ·Ô¤ çÜ° ÂýØæâ ¥æÂ ·¤Öè Öè àæéM¤ ·¤ÚU â·¤Ìð ãñ´Ð

Commentary

It is insulting

By Mahfuz Anam
On the 3rd of this month Philip Tose, Chairman of Pere-Ene Investments Holdings jited, based in Hong Kong, wrote a letter to our Prime Minister to. as he said, "protest in the most vigorous terms" the arrest warrants issued against Ms. Runa Alam and Mr. Sabeth Siddiqui, both employees of Peregrine, Bangladesh. Ms. Alam, a US citizen of Bangladeshi origin, is the Managing Director of the company, who has been sent here from the US to set up its operations.
It is quite natural, in fact laudable, that the head of an or-
ganisation should try to do everything in his power to protect his colleague in a distant coun-tty. It is not unusual for letters to be written to heads of governments by foreign companies as and when they feel that a case for drawing such attention exists. However these letters must, and do, conform to some norms of protocol and courtesy. They make their case with facts, logic and arguments and seldom with direct and indirect threats and innuendoes. Before commenting further on the letter we would like to reproduce
Fron Page 1 its last four paragraphs, lest we should be accused of quoting out of context. (The rest deals with introducing Ms. Alam)
(quote) The issue of an arrest warrant against her. clearly for politically motivated reasons, will have de ating results for Banglades including the possible closure of Peregrine's business in Bangladesh; loss of 46 local Jobs; th delay if not cancellation of r ijor infrastructure projects ii Bangladesh; the irreparable Jamage to Bangladesh's nai ■ in the international finan. ia! markets and with the multilateral financial agencies such as the World bank. I.F.C. and ADB with whom Runa Lad excellent relationships.
As for Peregr ;. I assure you that we will < everything in our power to dr tect our employees from false accusations made against them.
As Chairman and founder of the Peregrine Group, I would also like to register my personal unhappiness at the treatment of our company. I gave the go ahead for Peregrine to make a significant capital commitment to establish the first ever foreign banking presence in Bangladesh. Last year and again last month I visited your country and met you and all senior ministers: I was, I believe. the first chairman of an international investment bank ever to visit Bangladesh. I hosted conferences for you in Hong Kong and in New York and have actively promoted Bangladesh. I feel deeply hurt and let down by the action of your government. This is a great sadness to me. The business of investment banking in developing economies such as Bangladesh is not just about making profit, it is about helping ordinary people to lead better. longer and fuller lives.
Lastly, for the integrity and reputation of your country I would urge you with all speed to intercede on behalf of Runa Alam and Sabeth Siddique who are innocent parties caught up in the political fallout from a stock market crash that was not of their making, (unquote)
Is this the tone and language in which a letter can, and should be addressed to the elected Prime Minister of a sovereign country? The letter, we think is insulting to our country, to the office of the head of the government, and to the person of Sheikh Hasina.
It is insulting to the country because the letter is full of direct and indirect threats about "devastating results for Bangladesh" if actions suggested in the letter was not carried out. One reason, among many, as to why it is insulting to the office of the head of the government is because a copy of it was sent to all embassies and
multilateral bodies in Bangladesh almost simultaneously as it went to the Prime Minister. Before Sheikh Hasina could consider its contents, the same was known to most of the Ambassadors and heads of agencies in town, no doubt to exert pressure on her. This is contrary to fundamental norms of protocol and minimum sense of decency and respect for the high office. It is also insulting to the person of the Prime Minister because the Peregrine chairman says " I hosted conferences for you in Hong Kong and New York" implying a favour done to her for which there should now be quid pro quo. Mr. Tose belittles our government when he attributes action against Peregrine as "clearly for politically motivated reasons" as if we are incapable of doing things legally and fairly. And then, what possible political motives can our government have?
How does the chief of a private company dare to behave with us in this manner? It is because of the way we do things. Our tradition of showing highest respect to foreign guests and the easy access to the highest officials of the government that we permit, often totally disproportionate to the position of the visitors, is clearly seen as ingratiating acts diluting the respect and dignity of these offices. The fault is clearly ours. As Mr. Tose claims he met our Prime Minister and all our senior ministers, probably more than once. Why? What merited such reception? Just because he opened a bank, and that also because he and his staff knew that there would be definite profit to make. Which we know to be the name of the game, and is fine with us. But then why is that patronising attitude? It is from those easy accesses that he got the arrogance to write to our PM in the way he did. Then again, why did we allow Peregrine to host those conferences in Hong Kong and New York. Couldn't our embassies host them? Did our association with Peregrine gives us the best image in these two Elaces? We have reasons to be-eve otherwise.
Given the above points we think that a letter of apology from the Peregrine chief is well in order for the high handed manner in which he has communicated to our Prime Minister. However in demanding apology, we would like to clearly state that our reaction to Mr. Tose's letter in no way affects our view on the case against Ms. Alam and her colleague. They are not to be blamed for tneir boss's arrogance, and that the cases against them must be dealt in the best tradition of our legal system.