& 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

Hoping audaciously: Will 2008 be the year of the unthinkable?

Will 2008 also herald for Bangladeshis a closure finally on what one can only describe as the "original sin" - that of not bringing to justice the crimes against humanity committed during the liberation war and immediately in its wake? The nation was particularly appalled by the brazen assertions made by some quarters last year that no war crimes had been committed, that there were no war criminals; and that what took place in 1971 was not a liberation war but a "civil war" -- a particularly egregious attempt to change the essential nature and substance of the national discourse altogether. .
Tariq Karim
ABOUT eight months ago a cab driver in downtown Washington DC, commenting on the prospects of aspir-ing presidential candidates, remarked: ’'America get a black man or woman as president? -- no way* This ain’t gonna happen in this country, no sir. not in my lifetime it ain’t!'
An African - .American voiced this colourful but emphatic scepticism. Eight months later, the unthinkable appears to be on the brink of happening. The two leading candidates of the Democratic Party are a black man Barrack Husain Obama, and a white woman, Hillary Rodham Clinton (who claims the mantle of her white husband President Bill Clinton who was. and still is. known affectionately by many /African-Americans as 'the first black president").
Senator Obama, as of now the front-runner in terms of popular votes and delegates, wrote a book, The Audacity of Hope, which was published last year. Personifying Hope, he ventured bravely forth into grounds that few others of his ilk had trodden with any great measure or hope of success in the past His campaign, lifted by inspiring oratory not seen among politicians in recent times, audaciously tapped into yearning for a radical change in American politics and the desire for a better-led future.
His audacity to hope swept him through over a dozen consecutive victories in the primaries and caucuses (that strange and often little understood institution in American politics) over Senator Hillary Clinton, his formidable opponent with vast experience who had been so long regarded as
virtually the unchallengeable and presumptive Democratic nominee.
With most Americans exasperated and angry with the existing culture of partisan and divisive politics that many view as being the root cause for America’s domestic gridlock and sharp decline in its international image, Obama's message of a "change we can believe in" struck an emotive chord of hope across the nation. It fired the imagination of a broad crosssection of the electorate, not only within the Democratic Party but in sizeable numbers of uncommitted and independent voters as well, transcending party lines, age, gender, colour or personal affiliations.
His message of bringing a "change we can believe in," ending the increasingly unpopular war in Iraq and bringing troops home, diverting the monies so saved to creating jobs and addressing economic malaise that hurts the poor and middle class the most, and reaching out to the rest of the world in a more realistic and imaginative manner than hitherto, enthused the packed audiences he addressed at every rally to roar out: 'Yes, we can."
Not that Senator Obama on a roll has deterred Senator Clinton in any way. With predictable tenacity and verve, she has a similar message (their differences are more in the nature of semantics) and she has proven to be "one tough opponent,* as Senator Obama conceded in the last debate that featured the two. She has won the biggest states so far, and might do so once again in the next big state, Pennsylvania, where she leads in the polls and is generally expected to win — she has been endorsed by its governor and the influential mayor of
Philadelphia, the city where the US constitution was forged two hundred and twenty one years ago.
Senator Obama has so far been very successful in closing gaps in the polls and beating his opponents hollow in fund-raising, perilously so for Senator Clinton, who can no longer take anything for granted It remains to be seen whether he can continue repeating his earlier magic, with the campaigning from the opposition, whether from within his own party or from his Republican foes, turning increasingly negative and nastier by the day.
These are early days yet, and while the Republican party has already wound up its prenomination battles with the septuagenarian Senator John McCain risen from the ashes and now, for all practical purposes, the GOP's nominee with even detractors within his own party closing ranks behind him as is that Party's tradition, the Democratic Party appears to be tearing itself apart with inflammatory cross-charges, and heated discourses revolving around race and gender wracking it.
Should this self-lacerating process drag on too far and for too long, the presidency could very well be handed over by default to another Republican come November 2008 — and that African-American cab driver's gloomy prophecy that America was not yet ready for change, voiced so gloomily last year, may yet prove self-fulfilling.
However, most Americans appear to be deeply disillusioned and angry with the disastrous adventurism of the Bush administration and its various policy debacles over the last seven years, that have bled America, plunged it into a recession, and alienated it from the world at large. If the Democrats can finally get their act together (thus making the next elections one for the Democrats to lose through folly by snatching defeat from the jaws of victory), it is very likely that at least one unthinkable scenario will materialise at the end of this year - Americans will elect, as their 44th president, either a black man or a white woman as their first non-white or first woman, cither scenario creating an historic precedent.
Numerous pundits have started conjecturing about the two getting together as a team on a "dream ticket," with one of them as the presidential candidate and the other as running mate. Should that drcam ticket materialise (although one combination seems more probable than the other, and both seem unlikely as of now), a second unthinkable will have happened in American politics, marking a once in a lifetime epoch-making landmark in its history.
Will 2008 be the year for a major paradigm shift in America, this 221 year old much touted bastion of democracy? Not a given by a long shot yet, but for the time being at least many Americans across a vast expanse of this country still have the audacity to hope!
But changes appear to be in the air across the world as well, in countries as far away as in South Asia. Most of these have a poor record, and much shorter and questionable (or no) history, of democracy. Elections have been held or are scheduled to be held in Pakistan, Nepal, Bhutan and Bangladesh this year, and in India next year. Nepal's elections have brought Maoists into the mainstream and tolled the inevitable demise of monarchy as it was known, precipitated by acts of omission and commission by the king himself.
In Bhutan, wonder of wonders, a people for the greater part quite unfamiliar with democracy and its precepts are being cajoled and led into it by a king who could have chosen to have remained absolute monarch indefinitely. Pakistanis, who got used to having their attempts at democratic governance trampled contemptuously
under the boots of armed forces, have just successfully turned a critically important corner in their long but tortuous journey towards democracy. The largely free and fai r elections held recently, despite fears that the general-turned president of that country would succumb to the temptation of subverting it, may well be a defining moment in that journey.
Benazir Bhutto, in her death, achieved what she may not have been able to achieve while she was alive -- uniting the fractious and hitherto bitter foes that they were, her PPP and Mian Nawaz Sharifs Muslim League (N) into a meaningful alliance along with the Awami National Party and the MQM, and doing the unthinkable, routing not only General Musharaf's governing party of choice, the Muslim League (Q), but the Islamists as well, at least for the time being.
The voters of Pakistan clearly opted for a return to civilian and moderate rule, resoundingly say-ing"no" to the military and to those espousing bigotry. The precursor to all this was another unthinkable --the judiciary in Pakistan suddenly discovered that it had a spine after all, and with great courage refused to be intimidated into kowtowing to the military, finally breaking away from a tradition so lamentably established in the mid-fifties that had served to define them until last year. And, as if all these strange and wondrous developments were not enough by themselves, the PPP and the party that had been its viscerally charged enemy for so long, the PML(N), are forming a coalition government with consensus (so far) on most major policy agenda!
The Pakistanis appear to have leamt from Bangladesh's history of mistakes and its many lost and squandered opportunities. Whether these lessons are merely of passing import, or mark a more fundamental change in their political culture remains to be seen. Time will tell, but al! are audaciously hopeful! In doing so, one recalls here these famous words voiced by British Prime Minister Harold Macmillan a little over forty eight years ago in the context of another continent, Africa: "The
wind of change is blowing through this continent. Whether we like it or not, this growth of national consciousness is a political fact."
Bangladesh, separated from Pakistan in 1971, appeared to have learnt naught from Pakistan's history and many sins? On the contrary, Bangladesh's leaders, almost without exception, re-embraced the worst of Pakistan's political legacies and practices and then, in orgies of unimaginable selfishness, inflicted them on a hapless population?
Bangladesh lost its golden opportunity in 1991, when the broad coalition of political parties that sent the army back to banacks should have formed a government of national unity to forge a consensus on the nation's myriad problems but did not, instead opting for short-term partisan -- and personal -- gains over the national interest
From the early days of Pakistan even most West Pakistanis looked upon the judiciary of Bangladesh with great respect as exemplars of independence, integrity and courage. Post-1971, it not only lost that reputation but progressively appeared to have lost its spine as well, while Bengalis set upon other Bengalis despite the absence of any sectarian, ethnic, tribal or other kind of division existing in the nation.
No wonder the long-suffering and weary people of Bangladesh, feeling betrayed and let down by their leaders, also yearn for change. Dare they hope that 2008 will also be a momentous year of change for them as well?
Will 2008 also herald for Bangladeshis a closure finally on what one can only describe as the "original sin" — that of not bringing to justice the crimes against humanity committed during the liberation war and immediately in its wake? The nation was particularly appalled by the brazen assertions made by some quarters last year that no war crimes had been committed, that there were no war criminals; and that what took place.in 197T \vas npt a,liberation , war but a "civil war" •- a particu- • larly egregious attempt to change the essential nature and substance of the national discourse
altogether.
Perhaps the people who dared so cheekily to make these brazen assertions did so on the calculation that the government would follow the pattern of previous military regimes in Bangladesh -- open up political space for the right and redefine Bangladesh's essential ethos. However, this time they may have miscalculated grievously, judging from the eruption of outrage across the nation.
The movement now underway particularly heartens one, echoing resonantly across civil society, voicing the demand for the long over-due trial ofwar criminals. This movement already appears to have brought together former political antagonists on the same platform. It is quite possible that in the process of trying identified war criminals, counter accusations will also be leveled against Bangladeshis having indulged in acts of brutality that provided the casus belli for the subsequent counter-brutalities that were unleashed on the Bengalis (as indeed was indicated recently by Ikram Sehgal in his article "Road back from perdition" published in The Daily Star on March 20).
A number of Pakistanis and detractors of Bangladesh's case for such trials have raised questions about the credibility of the figures cited as total casualties — that the figure of 3 million cited by Bangladesh is overly inflated and statistically impossible, etc.
As I have contended elsewhere, these are essentially exercises in semantics, attempting to marginalise, or entirely ignoring, the inescapable truth -- reduction of the number of digits does not in any manner negate the truth that war crimes were committed against sufficiently large numbers of persons, to render their consideration under purview of the same logic and rules that have been applied by the International Criminal Court in recent times against persons accused of having committed crimes against humanity elsewhere, in the world.
So, let this process begin as quickly as possible, and clarify truth from myth, once and for all.
Let the truth be exposed - this may actually do a great service to Bangladeshi compatriots in Pakistan, a vast majority of whom have been deliberately kept in the dark, yes even until today, about what happened in 1971 through what K.K. Aziz described in his seminal (but not largely circulated) work as the deliberate Murder of History. Dare one harbour the audacity to hope that this is the first step forward to healing the nation’s wounds, and will open up the way to national and regional reconcilia -tion?The remaining months left in this year will tell.
In the meantime, all Bangladeshis do hope with unre-strained audacity that Bangladesh's flawed political culture can be changed; that its judiciary will regain its lost independence and integrity; that its core institutions will finally take roots and be insulated from future attempts at tampering by politicians; that its bureaucracy and political masters will become accountable and capable of efficiently delivering much-needed services to the people that they failed to do so far; that corruption will be rolled back progressively and brought to accountability, through a combination of regulatory reforms and their implementation but more importantly by the dynamics of a qualitative change in societal discourse; and that there will finally be a process that will bring to closure the festering wounds from 1971 that are still raw for many.
Above all, they have the audacity to hope that all these changes will be changes the people can believe in; that these changes will flow not by fiat or the diktat of a coterie but from an expression of the people's will exercised freely, fairly and without let or hindrance, under the aegis of a truly independent Election Commission with unimpeachable credibility — so that the people of Bangladesh will also finally be able to declare proudly with heads held high and resonantly, foe the world to hear: "Yes, we can." । - - - - - - ♦ ;
Tariq Karim is a retired diplomat and former Ambassador of Bangladesh to the United States.