& 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

The world has changed, our leaders have not

Political blame game continues as terrorists tear us apart

MAHFUZ ANAM
The opposition has rejected the government's call for a dialogue, terming it a 'farce' or at best a 'drama' to confuse the public. Why? Because the AL claims the government, while calling for a dialogue,
continues to blame the opposition for all the terrorist acts of the past, including the recent ones. As the guilt has already been apportioned, the opposition argues, the so-called dialogue will be only for the gallery (both domestic and international) while nothing will be done to catch
the real culprits, who they say exist both within the BNP and of course within its coalition partners, especially the Jamaat.
While we think there is substantial ground for the opposition to
SEE PAGE 2 COL 6 FROM PAGE 1
suspect both the intention and the sincerity of the government in calling for the dialogue, we do not think there are sufficient grounds for rejecting it. In deciding on the dialogue issue Sheikh Hasina and the AL have uniquely focused on the BNP. But there is a third party here whose wishes should have reigned supreme in the mind of a political party like the AL -- the people -which the AL leadership has fatally failed to consider.
Ask any ordinary citizen what is the most important concern they have at this moment and the unhesitant answer will be terrorism. Then ask them how it should be solved and they will say all our political parties should discuss the matter and lead the nation out of this dangerous and destructive threat. People do not expect any instant magical solution. They want to see their leaders and their major political parties take their concern seriously enough to leave aside all their past hatred and suspicions and address the life and death question they are facing now.
Before we go further in trying to make the case for the opposition to attend the dialogue we must underscore how the ruling party's handling of the terrorist phenomenon has so greatly contributed to the present outburst of its activities and the opposition's stiffness in participating in any dialogue with it.
For all the terrorist activities that occurred in the last three years -starting from September 2002 with the cinema blasts in Satkhira to the attack on Sylhet Mayor Badaruddin Ahmed Kamran on December 2, 2005, which killed some 90 people -the government, the BNP and the Prime Minister herself almost always blamed the AL.
There were times when such blaming came within hours of the event before any investigating agency could even start its work. The most outlandish example of this heinous blame game was the BNP leaders' accusing the AL for the grenade attack on Sheikh Hasina that killed 22 of its leaders and workers including Ivy Rahman, chief of AL's women wing. In the cases of assassinations of both Ahsanullah Master and SAMS Kibria there were attempts at the initial stage to depict them as victims of internecine feud until facts proved otherwise.
The same thing occurred after the present spate of suicide bomb-
ings had started. From the outset the same old vicious campaign was let lose against the opposition that they were behind the terror attacks. In fact, save for one occasion on November 30, 2005, all other public utterances by the PM on this topic left no doubt on any reader's or listener's mind that she held the AL responsible for all the terrorist attacks. Such blaming of the opposition came in the face of daily confessions by arrested JMB members that it was they, not the AL, who did the carnage. The only link emerging from the investigation was with the Jamaat. So far absolutely no evidence, leave aside credible ones, have been found against the AL's involvement. Even then for the calumny to continue, and that also from the person of the highest executive of the country, is definitely a reason enough for the opposition to feel hostile.
We would like to strongly state that the Prime Minister, her government and her party have grievously wronged the people by indulging in what is clearly a false propaganda. They also have damaged the functioning of democracy by misusing the power and influence of their office in denigrating the opposition in this manner. It may not be illogical to conclude that the government's actions may have directly or indirectly influenced the investigations, which is why so little progress has been made in most of the instances. It may have even encouraged the perpetrators of the crimes as they saw the government actions diverting public attention away from them and deflecting investigators' gaze in other directions.
Having said all that above, which we have written editorially from time to time, we consider the AL's rejection of the talks offer as a wrong decision. We think the refusal to even accept the PM's letter was a childish act that makes the opposition leader appear impetuous. Just when the people expect calm and deliberated action from our leaders, especially from one who was our Prime Minister earlier and may be so again, such instant reaction cannot help the process of public confidence building about her and her party. There were a thousand different ways of reacting to the PM's letter, all of which could have been compatible with the basic wishes of the opposition. Instead of following any one of them, going for
such a categorical rejection of the dialogue can only dishearten people more and raise the sense of the allpervading despondency which is engulfing the nation now.
Not only was the rejection a mistake, it was also a grand opportunity lost for the opposition to place before the government all the various demands of reforms they have been clamouring for. How on earth their reform demands will be implemented without a dialogue with the ruling party and subsequent amendments brought in parliament?
So, just as the ruling BNP and Khaleda Zia are playing the usual narrow, partisan and arrogant politics, so also is the AL and Sheikh Hasina operating in the same nonconstructive, stubborn and irresponsible vein as before. In facing the crisis posed by the terrorists, especially the suicide bombers, the behaviour of our two supreme political leaders has been disgustingly predictable. “Blame the opposition” from one side and “Reject every government offer” from the other side have nothing to offer to the people except more and more disappointments. Both these approaches are detrimental to our national interests and suicidal to facing the present national crisis. Their behaviour forces us to conclude that our leaders seem to be totally unaware that the world around us has changed and that the present threat is nothing like what we faced in the past. These terrorists aim to destroy everything we have so far built, every aspect of freedom we have so far gained and every facet of our culture we have so carefully nurtured and protected from our past oppressors. They also plan to destroy the BNP and the AL if they get half a chance.
The very word 'leader' implies the ability to lead, lead to something better, to new options, to better opportunities, to newer ways of doing old things, to greater efficiency, to improved knowledge, to better understanding, to bringing greater good to a greater number of people, to solving problems and moving on to greater challenges, not to keeping alive old wounds and prejudices. The list goes on and on. In fact there is practically no end to what a committed and honest leadership can do. But we seem to have no such luck.