Banner Advertise

Monday, August 13, 2012

[chottala.com] History : Tajuddin Statement, April 17, 1971



Did Tajuddin ommitted to mention about the declaration of independence (by MUjib at early hour) intentiontionally or he did because there was none (other than fabricated one)? 
 
Shahadat Suhrawardy
 
 
History : Tajuddin Statement, April 17, 1971

To the people of the world

A statement issued by the Prime Minister of Bangladesh, Mr. Tajuddin Ahmed, on April 17, 1971.

Bangla Desh is at war. It has been given no choice but to secure its right of self-determination through a national liberation struggle against the colonial oppression of West Pakistan.

In the face of positive attempts by the Government to distort the facts in a desperate attempt to cover up their war of genocide in Bangla Desh, the world must be told the circumstances under which the peace-loving people of Bangla Desh were driven to substitute armed struggle for parliamentary politics to realize the just aspirations of the people of Bangla Desh.

The Six Point Programme for autonomy for Bangla Desh within Pakistan had been put forward in all sincerity by the Awami League as the last possible solution to preserve the integrity of Pakistan. Fighting the elections to the National Assembly on the issue of Six Points, the Awami League won 167 out of 169 seats from Bangla Desh out of a house of 313. Its electoral victory was so decisive that it won 80% of the popular votes cast. The decisive nature of its victory placed it in a clear majority within the National Assembly.

The post election period was a time of hope, for never had a people spoken so decisively in the history of parliamentary democracy. It was widely believed in both wings that a viable constitution based on six points could be worked out. The Pakistan Peoples party which emerged as the leading party in Sind and Punjab had avoided raising the issue of Six Points in their election campaign and had no obligation whatsoever to its electorate to resist it. In Baluchistan the dominant party, National Awami Party, was fully committed to Six Points. In NWFP, the NAP dominant in the Provincial Assembly, was also a believer in maximum autonomy. The course of the elections, which marked the defeat of the reactionary parties, therefore, gave every reason to be optimistic about the future of democracy in Pakistan. Preparatory to the convening of the National Assembly talks were expected between the main parties in the political areas. However, whilst the Awami League was always willing, preparatory to going to the Assembly, to explain its constitutional position and to discuss alternative proposals from other parties, it is believed that the spirit of true democracy demanded that the constitution be debated and finalized in the National Assembly rather tan in secret sessions. To this end, it insisted on an early summoning of the National Assembly. In anticipation of this session, the Awami League worked day and night to prepare a draft constitution based on Six Points and fully examined all the implications of formulating and implementing such a constitution.

The first major talks over Pakistans political future took place between General and Sheikh Mujibur Rahman in Mid-January. In this session General proved the extent of the Awami Leagues commitment to its programme and was assured that they were fully aware of its implications. But contrary to expectation did not fully spell out his own ideas about the constitution. General gave the impression of not finding anything seriously objectionable in Six Points but emphasized the need for coming to an understanding with the PPP in Western Pakistan.

The next round of talks took place between the PPP and the Awami League from 27th January, 1971 in Dacca where Mr. Bhutto and his team held a number of sessions with the Awami League to discuss the constitution.

As in the case with, Mr. Bhutto did not bring any concrete proposals of his own about the nature of the constitution. He and is advisors were mainly interested in discussing the implications of Six Points. Since their responses were essentially negative and they had no prepared brief of their own it was not possible for the talks to develop into serious negotiations where attempts could be made to bridge the gap between the two parties. It was evident that as yet Mr. Bhutto had no formal position of his own from which to negotiate.

It must be made clear that when the PPP left Dacca there was no indication from their part that a deadlock had been reached with the Awami League. Rather they confirmed that all doors were open and that following a round of talks with the West Pakistani leaders the PPP would either have a second and more substantive round of talks with the Awami League or would meet in the National Assembly whose committees provided ample opportunity for detailed discussion on the constitution.

Mr. Bhuttos announcement to boycott the National Assembly, therefore, came as a complete surprise. The boycott decision was surprising because Mr. Bhutto had already been accommodated once by the President when he refused Sheikh Mujibs plea for an early session of the Assembly on the 15th of February and fixed it, in line with Mr. Bhuttos preference, for 3rd March.

Following his decision to boycott the Assembly, Mr. Bhutto Launched a campaign of intimidation against all other parties in West Pakistan to prevent them from attending the session. In this task there is evidence that Lt. Gen. Umer, Chairman of the National Security Council and close associate of, with a view to strengthening Mr. Bhuttos hand, personally pressured various West Wing leaders not to attend the Assembly. In spite of this display of pressure tactics by Mr. Bhutto and Lt. Gen. Umer, all members of the National Assembly from West Pakistan, except the PPP and the Qayyum Muslim League, had booked their seats to East Pakistan, for the session on 3rd March.

Within the QML itself, half their members had booked their seats and there were signs of revolt within the PPP where many members were wanting to come to Dacca. Faced with the breakdown of this joint front against Bangla Desh, General obliged Mr. Bhutto on 1st March by postponing the Assembly, not for any definite period, but sine die. Moreover he dismissed the Governor of East Pakistan, Admiral S. M. Ahsan, who was believed to be one of the moderates in his administration. The Cabinet with its component of Bengalis was also dismissed so that all power was concentrated in the hands of the West Wing military junta.

In these circumstances Yahyas gesture could not be seen as anything but an attempt to frustrate the popular will by colluding with Mr. Bhutto. The National Assembly was the only forum where Bangla Desh could assert its voice and political strength, and to frustrate this was a clear indication that Parliament was not to be the real source of power in Pakistan.

The reaction to the postponement in Bangla Desh was inevitable and spontaneous and throughout the land people took to the streets to record their protest at this arbitrary act. People now felt sure that never really intended to transfer power, and was making a mockery of parliamentary politics. The popular mood felt that the rights of Bangla Desh could never be realized within the framework of Pakistan, where could so blatantly frustrate the summoning of an assembly proclaimed by his own writ and urged that Sheikh Mujibur Rahman must go for full independence.

Sheikh Mujib however continued to seek a political settlement. In calling for a programme of non-cooperation on 3rd March he chose the weapon of peaceful confrontation against the army of occupation as an attempt to bring them to their senses. This was in itself a major gesture in the face of the cold blooded firing on unarmed demonstrators on the 2nd and 3rd March which had already led to over a thousand casualties.

The course of the non-cooperation movement is now a part of history. Never in the course of any liberation struggle has non-cooperation been carried to the limits attained within Bangladesh between first and 25th March. Non-cooperation was total. No judge of the High Court could be found to administer the oath of office to the new Governor Lt. General Tikka Khan. The entire civilian administration including he police and the Civil Service of Pakistan, refused to attend office. The people stopped supply of food to the army. Even the civilian employees of the Defence establishment joined the boycott.

Non-cooperation did not stop at abstention from work. The civilian administration and the police positively pledged their support to Sheikh Mujibur Rahman and put themselves under his orders.

In this situation the Awami League without being a formally constituted Government, was forced to take on the responsibility of keeping the economy and administration running whilst non-cooperation lasted. In this task they had the unqualified support not only of the people but the administration and the business community. The latter two subordinated themselves to the directives of the Awami League and accepted them as the sole authority to solve their various problems.

In these unique circumstances the economy and administration were kept going in spite of the formidable problems arising out of the power vacumm which has suddenly emerged in Bangla Desh. In spite of the lack of any formal authority, Awami League volunteers, in cooperation with the police, maintained a level of law and order which was a considerable improvement on normal times.

Faced with this demonstration of total support to the Awami League and this historic non-cooperation movement, General appears to have modified his tactics. On the 6th March, he still seemed determined to provoke a confrontation when he made his highly provocative speech putting the full blame on the crisis, on the Awami League and not even referring to the architect of the crisis, Mr. Bhutto. It seems that he expected a declaration of independence on 7th March. The Army in Dacca was put on full alert to crush the move and Lt. Gen. Tikka Khan was flown in to replace Lt. Gen. Yakub to signify the hardening of attitudes within the Junta.

Sheikh Mujib, however, once again opted for the path of political settlement in spite of massive public sentiment for independence. In presenting his 4-point proposal for attending the National Assembly he not only had to contain the public mood but to leave a way open for to explore this last chance of a peaceful settlement.

it is now clear that and his Generals never had the slightest intention of solving Pakistans political crisis peacefully but were only interested in buying time to permit the reinforcement of their military machine within Bangla Desh. Yahyas visit to Dacca was a mere cover for his plan of genocide. It now becomes clear that contingency plans for such a crisis had already begun well in advance of the crisis.

Shortly before 1st March tanks which had been sent north to Rangpur to defend the borders were brought back to Dacca. From the 1st March the families of Army personnel were being sent off to West Pakistan on a priority basis as were the families of West Pakistani businessmen.

The military build-up was accelerated after 1st March and continued throughout the talks up to 25th March. Members of the armed forces dressed in civilian clothes were flown in PIA commercial flights via Ceylon. C 130s carrying arms and provisions for the garrisons flew in to Dacca. It is estimated that up to one division, with complementary support, was brought into Bangla Desh between 1st and 25th March. To ensure security, the airport was put under strict airforce control and heavily guarded with artillery and machine gun nets whilst movement of passengers was strictly supervised. As SSG commando group especially trained in operations in sabotage and assassinations was distributed in key centers of Bangla Desh and were probably responsible for the attacks on Bengalis in Dacca and Saidpur in the two days before 25th march to provoke clashes between locals and non-locals so as to provide a cover for military intervention.

As part of this strategy of deception adopted the most conciliatory posture in his talks with Mujib. In the talks beginning on the 16th of march, he expressed regrets for what had happened and his sincere desire for a political settlement. In a crucial meeting with Sheikh Mujib he was asked to positively state the Juntas position on the Awami Leagues 4-point proposal. He indicated that there was no serious objection and that an interim constitution could be worked out by the respective advisors embodying the four points.

The basic points on which agreement was reached were:

  1. Lifting of Martial Law and transfer of power to a Civilian Government by a Presidential Proclamation.
  2. Transfer of power in the provinces to the majority parties
  3. To remain as President and in control of the Central Government
  4. Separate sittings of the National Assembly members from East an West Pakistan preparatory to a joint session of the house to finalize the constitution.
Contrary to the distortions now put out by both and Bhutto the proposal for separate sittings of the Assembly was suggested by to accommodate Mr. Bhutto. Hi cite the practical advantage that whilst 6-points provided a viable blueprint to regulate relations between Bangla Desh and the Center its application would raise serious difficulties in the West Wing. Fro this reason West Wing MNAs must be permitted to get together to work out a new pattern of relationships in the context of the Six-point constitution and the dissolution of One Unit.

Once this agreement in principle had been reached between Sheikh Mujib and there was only the question of defining the powers of Bangla Desh vis-a-vis the Centre during the interim phase. Here it was again jointly agreed that the distribution of power should as far as possible approximate to the final constitution approved by the National Assembly which, it was expected, would be based on Six Points.

For working out this part of the interim settlement Mr. M. M. Ahmed, the Economic Advisor to the President was specially flown in. In his talks with the Awami League advisors he made it clear that provided the political agreement had been reached there were no insuperable problem to working out some version of Six Points even in the interim period. The final list of three amendments to the Awami League draft which he presented as suggestions, indicated that the gap between the Government and Awami League position was no longer one of principle but remained merely over the precise phrasing of the proposals. The Awami league in its sitting of 24th March had accepted the amendments with certain minor changes of language and there was nothing to prevent the holding of a final drafting session between the advisors of and Mujib when the interim constitution would be finalized.

It must be made clear that at no stage was there any breakdown of talks or any indication by General or his team that they had a final position which could not be abandoned.

The question of legal cover for the transfer of power is merely another belated fabrication by to cover his genocide. He and his team had agreed that, in line with the precedence of the Indian Independence Act of 1947, power could be transferred by Presidential Proclamation. The notion that there would be no legal cover to the agreement raised subsequently by Mr. Bhutto and endorsed by General was never a bone of contention between Sheikh Mujib and. There is not the slightest doubt that had indicated that a meeting of the National Assembly was essential to transfer power, the Awami League would not have broken the talks on such a minor legal technicality. After all as the majority party it had nothing to fear from such a meeting and its acceptance of the decision for a separate sitting was designed to accommodate Mr. Bhutto rather than a fundamental stand fro the party.

Evidence that agreement in principle between contending parties had been reached is provided by Mr. Bhuttos own Press Conference on 25th March. It is not certain what passed in the separate session between General and Mr. Bhuttto but there is evidence that deliberate falsehoods about the course of the talk with the Awami League were fed to the PPP who were told that Sheikh Mujib was determined to have a showdown and was daily escalating his demands. Needless to say not the slightest indication of these misgivings have been raised in the meetings between the Awami League team and General Yahyas advisors where amicability and optimism prevailed to the end.

Whilst hope for a settlement was being raised more ominous signs of the intentions of the army were provided by their sudden decision to unload the munition ship M.V. Swat berthed at Chittagong Port. Preparatory to this decision, Brigadier Mazumdar, a Bengali officer commanding the garrison in Chittagong had been suddenly removed from his command and replaced by a West Pakistani. On 24th night he was flown to Dacca under armed escort and has probably been executed. Under the new command notice was given to local authorities of the decision to unload the ship in spite of the fact that the army had abstained from doing so for the last 17 days in the face of non-cooperation from the port workers. The decision to unload was a calculated provocation which immediately brought 100,000 people on the streets of Chittagong and led to massive firing by the Army to break their way out. The issue was raised by the Awami League with General Peerzada as to why this escalation was being permitted whilst talks were still going on. He gave no answer beyond a promise to pass it on to General.

Following the final meeting between General Yahyas and Awami Leagues advisors on 24th March where Mr. M.M. Ahmed passed on his amendments, a call was awaited from General Peerzada for a final session where the draft could be finalized. No such call materialized and instead it was learnt that Mr. M. M. Ahmed, who was central to the negotiations, had suddenly left for Karachi on the 25th morning without and warning to the Awami League team.

By 11P.M. of the 25th all preparations were ready and the troops began to take up their positions in the city. In an act of treachery unparalleled in contemporary history a programme of calculated genocide was unleashed on the peaceful and unsuspecting population of Dacca by midnight of 25th March. No ultimatum was given tot he Awami League by, no curfew order as even issued when the machine guns, artillery and canon on the tanks unleashed their reign of death and destruction. By the time the first Martial Law proclamations issued by Lt. General Tikka Kahn were broadcast the next morning some 50,000 people, most of them without offering any resistance, and many women and children, had been butchered. Dacca had been turned into an inferno with fires raging in most corners of the city. Sleeping inhabitants who have been drawn from their homes by the fires started by the military, were machine gunned as they ran to escape the flames.

Whilst the police, EPR, and armed volunteers put up a heroic resistance, the main victims remained the weak, the innocent and the unsuspecting who were killed at random in their thousands. We are compiling a first hand account of the details of genocide committed by the Pakistani Army on the orders of the President of Pakistan which we will publish shortly. The scale and brutality of the action exceeds anything perpetrated in the civilized world.

himself left Dacca on the night of 25th March after having unleashed the Pakistan Army, with an open license to commit genocide on all Bengalis. His own justification for this act of barbarism was not forthcoming till 8 P.M. the next day when the world was given its first explanation for the unleashing of this holocaust. This statement was self-contradictory and laced with positive lies. His branding of a party as traitors and outlaws, with whom he had only 48 hours ago been negotiating for a peaceful transfer of power, bore no relationship to the situation in Bangla Desh or the course of the negotiations. His promise to hand over power to the elected representatives of the people after banning the Awami League which was the sole representative of Bangla Desh and held a majority of seats in the National Assembly was a mockery of the freely recorded voice of 75 million Bengalis. The crudity of the statement was clear evidence that was no longer interested in taking shelter b ehind either logic or morality and had reverted to the law of the jungle in his bid to crush the people of Bangla Desh.

Pakistan is now dead and buried under a mountain of corpses. The hundreds and thousands of people murdered by the army in Bangla Desh will act as an impenetrable barrier between West Pakistan and the people of Bangla Desh. By resorting to pre-planned genocide must have known that he was himself digging Pakistans grave. The subsequent massacres perpetrated on his orders by his licensed killers on the people were not designed to preserve the unity of a nation. They were acts of racial hatred and sadism devoid of even the elements of humanity. professional Soldiers, on orders, violated their code of military honour and were seen as beasts of prey who indulged in an orgy of murder, rape, loot, arson and destruction unequaled in the annals of civilization. These acts indicate that the concept of two countries is already deeply rooted in the minds of and his associates who would not dare commit such atrocities on their own countrymen.

Yahyas genocide is thus without political purpose. It serves only as the last act in the tragic history of Pakistan which has chosen to write with the blood of the people of Bangla Desh. The objective is genocide and scorched-earth before his troops are either driven out or perish. In this time he hopes to liquidate our political leadership, intelligence and administration, to destroy our industries and public amenities and as a final act he intends to raze our cities to the ground. Already his occupation army has made substantial progress towards this objective. Bangla Desh will be set back 50 years as West Pakistans parting gift to a people they have exploited for 23 years for their own benefit.

This is a point of major significance to those great powers who choose to ignore this largest single act of genocide since the days of Belsen and Auschwitz. If they think they are preserving the unity of Pakistan they can forget it because himself has no illusions about the future of Pakistan.

They must realize that Pakistan is dead and murdered by - and that independent Bangla Desh is a reality sustained by the indestructible will and courage of 75 million Bangalis who are daily nurturing the roots of this new nationhood with their blood. No power on earth can unmake this new nation and sooner or later both big and small powers will have to accept it into the world fraternity.

It is therefore, in the interest of politics as much as humanity for the big powers to put their full pressure on to cage his killers and bring them back to West Pakistan. We will be eternally grateful to the people of USSR and India and the freedom loving people of all countries for their full support they have already given us in this struggle. We would welcome similar support from the Peoples Republic of China, USA, France, Great Britain and all Afro Asian countries who have freed themselves from colonial rule and from all freedom loving countries. Each in their own way should exercise considerable leverage on West Pakistan; and were they to exercise this influence, could not sustain his war of aggression against Bangla Desh for a single day longer.

Bangla Desh will be the eighth most populous country in the world. Its only goal will be to rebuild the nation from the ashes and carnage left behind by Yahyas occupation army. It will be a stupendous task because of destruction of economy by Yahyas army in our already underdeveloped and overpopulated region. But we now have a cause and a people who have been hardened in the resistance, who have shed their blood for their nation and won their freedom in an epic struggle which pitted unarmed people against a modern army. Such a nation cannot fail in its task of securing the foundations of its nationhood.

In our struggle for survival we seek the friendship of all people, the big powers and the small. We do not aspire to join any bloc or pact but will seek assistance from those who give it in a spirit of goodwill free from any desire to control our destinies. We have struggled far too long for our self determination to permit ourselves to become anyones satellite.

We now appeal to the nations of the world for recognition and assistance both material and moral in our struggle for nationhood. Every day this is delayed a thousand lives are lost and more of Bangla Deshs vital assets are destroyed. In the name of Humanity act now and earn our undying friendship.

This we now present to the world as the CASE of the people of Bangla Desh. Bangla Desh has earned her right to recognition at great cost, as the people of Bangla Desh made sacrifices of unequal magnitude and fought hard in order to establish the rightful place for Bangla Desh in the community of Nations.



__._,_.___


[* Moderator's Note - CHOTTALA is a non-profit, non-religious, non-political and non-discriminatory organization.

* Disclaimer: Any posting to the CHOTTALA are the opinion of the author. Authors of the messages to the CHOTTALA are responsible for the accuracy of their information and the conformance of their material with applicable copyright and other laws. Many people will read your post, and it will be archived for a very long time. The act of posting to the CHOTTALA indicates the subscriber's agreement to accept the adjudications of the moderator]




Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___

[chottala.com] Mujib, 7 March 71 Speech and Call for Independence



"By the evening of 25 March 71, the emotional split with the West Pakistanis was complete; the country was ready to sever all formal ties with them and march ahead towards independence, but the question is whether the leader was ready for it?"

Answer: No, he was not at all.

 
Shahadat Suhrawardy
 
Mujib, 7 March 71 Speech and Call for Independence

 
By Tuhin Reza

 
Sheikh Mujibur Rahman's speech of 7 March 1971 has a special place in the history of Bangladesh's war of independence. Throughout the 9-month's bloody struggle against the Pak occupation forces people drew inspiration from it. Many people term it as the call for independence. But what was in it?

A careful analysis of the speech will demonstrate that different parts of the speech were addressed to different audience; part of it was for the people of Bangladesh and part for the Pakistani authorities. In fact, although there were things in the speech, which were meant for domestic consumption, the speech was mainly used to send a clear message to the Pakistani authorities. The message was that the Pakistani authorities had no other option but to handover power to Mujib if they wanted the unity of Pakistan.

Mujib was jumping from one issue to another and the speech lacked coherency. He talked about the frustration of Bengalis for not being able to take up the reigns of the country. Reminding about the majority position of the Bengalis in Pakistan he said, "In the past too, each time we, the numerically larger segment of Pakistan's population tried to assert our rights and control our destiny, they (West Pakistanis) conspired against us and pounded upon us."

He called for total civil disobedience. Then he said, "The people of this country are being murdered; so be on guard. If need be, every thing will be brought to a standstill. Officers will collect wages on the 28th day. If the salaries are held up, if a single bullet is fired, if the murder of my people does not cease, I call upon you to turn every home into a fortress. Use whatever you can to confront the enemy. Even if I cannot give instructions, every last road must be blocked."

Mujib in his speech addressed the Pakistani troops as his brothers and gave them full assurance of security if they would remain in the barracks. This was despite the fact that they had already engaged in killing hundreds of Bengalis. An official statement published by the then Pakistan Government on 10 March 1971 admitted that up to that date 172 Bengalis were killed and 3558 were injured at the hands of the Pak military and security forces.

The most significant part of the speech was Mujib's four demands. A careful analysis of these demands will show that even if all these demands were met, Bangladesh would not have been independent. Mujib demanded (1) immediate lifting of Martial Law; (2) return of Army to the barracks; (3) investigation of all killings; and (4) transfer of power to people's elective representatives. The most striking point was No. (4) transfer of power to elected representatives. What does it mean? To put it bluntly, Mujib demanded to make him the Prime Minister of Pakistan.

Towards the end of his speech Mujib declared, "when we have given blood we will give more, but we will make this country free Inshallah. This time, the struggle is for freedom, this struggle is for independence."

Apart from this single utterance nowhere in his speech he mentioned independence.

When journalists later accosted Mujib whether he had made a declaration of independence, he carefully avoided the issue by stating, "it can be interpreted in many ways". Between the election of 1970 and 25 March 1971, Mujib did not do anything that can be regarded as a challenge to the unity of Pakistan. In fact Mujib never stated in public that he did not have allegiance to Pakistan. He spoke about autonomy, but that was no secret; it was his election manifesto and part of 6-points.

However since the independence of Bangladesh some people have been claiming that it was always Mujib's intention to establish independent Bangladesh and that he had been dreaming about it since 1947. However, writers like Herbert Feldman have rejected this. For him, such ex post facto statement can hardly be reliable. (See Herbert Feldman The End and the Beginning: Pakistan 1969-71).

For the West Pakistanis, on 7 March, Mujib had this message, "To them, I say, you are our brothers. I beseech you not to turn this country into a living hell. Will you not have to show your face and confront your conscience some day?" He continued, "If we can peacefully settle our differences there is still hope that we can co exist as brothers. Otherwise there is no hope. Do not go to the extreme - (if you choose that), we may never come to see each other's face."

This would puzzle one - if Mujib had called for independence why was he talking about living as brothers?

Mujib ended his speech with 'Jay Bangla', 'Jay Punjab', 'Jay Sind', 'Jay Baluchistan', 'Jay Frontier Province', 'Jay Pakistan'. However later 'Jay Punjab' etc. was edited out from the record.

'Jay Bangla' together with 'Jay Pakistan' was not a new slogan for Mujib. On 3 January Mujib administered Oath to the elected representatives of Awami League at the Ramna Race Course Ground (present day Shurwardi Udyan) and finished it with 'Jay Bangla' and 'Jay Pakistan'. This was reported by the Daily Pakistan of 4 January. Abul Mansur Ahmed also mentions this incident in his book.

418 members of national and provincial assemblies took part in this Oath taking ceremony. An Oath-form was printed; every member was given a copy. 'Jay Bangla' and 'Jay Pakistan' were written on it. Mujib conducted this Oath taking ceremony pronouncing both 'Jay Bangla' and 'Jay Pakistan'. In fact during this time, as Abul Mansur Ahmed noted in his '50 Years of Politics' (Amer Dheka Rajnitir Panchash Bacher) Mujib was regularly uttering 'Jay Bangla' and 'Jay Pakistan'.

If Mujib had really called for independence on 7 March, then one wonders why would Yahya come to Dhaka to discuss politics with Mujib? It is inconceivable that a Pakistani President would come to talk about the break up of his country. He would only come for a discussion if he were given some sort of assurance that what was said at the Ramna Race Course was not what Mujib was actually contemplating. By the same token if Mujib had declared independence on the 7th why did he continue to have dialogues with Yahya? Surely he should have taken further steps to implement his desire for independence?

On 15 Narch 1971 Yahya came to Dhaka and he had several rounds of talks with Mujib. These two actually met for no less than 3 times without any aids in one-to-one meetings. They also had talks aided by members of their teams. Mujib never mentioned in public that the discussion was going nowhere. Rather he told journalists that he was making satisfactory progress. Awami League has never informed the nation what was discussed or agreed in these series of meetings.

The Dawn reported on the 24th March 1971 that a broad agreement and understanding was reached between Yahya and Mujib on the 22nd of March 1971 'to end the present political crisis in the country'. Unfortunately, the AL leadership have never explained what was this broad agreement and understanding. However, some light can be thrown; Shahjahan Siraj informs that on the 22nd of March Sheikh Moni told top student leaders that Mujib had agreed to form a coalition government at the centre with Bhutto's People's Party. A section of Awami League leadership was also willing to go ahead with this. However, the student leaders did not support this idea and pressure was placed on Mujib not to proceed with it.

The Awami Leadership after 25 March started calling Yahya's action of 25 March as a betrayal. The declaration of 17 April 1971 by the Mujibnagar government also mentioned that the Pakistani authorities acted treacherously instead of fulfilling their promise and that due to that act of betrayal this war of independence had commenced. But why call Yahya a betrayer? He was barbaric, no doubt, but why a betrayer? A person is a betrayer if he gives a pledge or promise and then goes back on it. What promise did Yahya make to Mujib or AL? Are they referring to that 'broad agreement and understanding'? Was it that they would be allowed to form the next government or share power and thus the question of independence would be pushed under the carpet? How can one come to terms with a call for independence on 7 March with the formation of a government in Islamabad?

Shahjahan Siraj also informs that Mujib knew about the impending crackdown of Pakistani Army much earlier than 25 March 1971. Mujib told the student leaders on the night of 23 March 1971 that Yahya Khan had agreed to share power with Mujib, however, his generals were not willing. Mujib also warned the student leaders that the crack down was imminent and it might start as early as the next day, 24 March 1971.

On 25 March, whole day, Mujib was waiting for a phone call from Lt. Gen Pirzada for a last meeting with Yahya. Mujib asked his top party brass to move to secured places on the night of 25 March. Alas! He did not do the same with his countrymen. If he had alerted the nation the way he had alerted his lieutenants about the impending crackdown, things would probably have been very different.

Before he was taken in by the Pakistani security forces Mujib gave an interview with the well-known French daily La Monde. He said, "Is the Pakistan Government not aware that I am the only one able to save East Pakistan from Communists?" This interview was published after his arrest on the 31st of March 1971. The irony is although Mujib here portrayed himself as a saviour from or a defender against communism, after liberation he inducted 'socialism' as one of the four fundamental principles of state policy. Some of his die heart supporters say that it was when Mujib was about to implement true socialism the agents of imperialism killed him.

Mujib might have good reasons for playing this communist card. The East Pakistan Communist Party and other Marxist and left leaning outfits had already started campaigning openly for an independent Bangladesh. They called for armed struggle to achieve it. On the other hand, AL or Mujib never uttered the word 'independence' apart from the speech of 7 March. Mujib saw himself as the person who could stop this communist campaign. He knew how worried the USA was about East Pakistan falling into the grip of communists.

What was the general mood in the then East Pakistan in March 1971 prior to the gruesome night of 25? Delay in handing over power to people's representatives had already turned the campaign for autonomy into a full bloom movement for independence. However, Awami League (except its students' wing) did not take part in it. In fact, during this period Awami League's student wing Student League (Chatra League) actually acted contrary to the politics of the main party.

On 2 March DUCSU (Dhaka University Central Students Union) VP and Student League leader A S M Abdur Rab hoisted a newly-designed flag of Bangladesh at the Dhaka University. Pakistani flag was burnt and 'Amar Sonar Bangla' was sung as national anthem for an independent Bangladesh. Later, Bangladeshi flags were hoisted in many shops, offices and vehicles by ordinary people. On the same day Siraj Sikhder, on behalf of the East Bengal Labour Movement issued an open letter to Mujib with a call to commence arms struggle against the Pakistanis.

On 3 March at a meeting at the Paltan Maidan organised by the Students League, Shahjahan Siraj, the then General Secretary of the Students League read out memorandum (Ishtehar) of independence of Bangladesh and declared programmes for the establishment of an independent and sovereign Bangladesh.

Mujib also spoke on this occasion. In his 30 minutes speech, Mujib however said nothing about an independent Bangladesh. He called upon the people to continue their struggle in a peaceful and organised manner (peaceful satyagraha). He urged them to remain alert against agent-provocateurs and to maintain complete peace and discipline and to rise to the occasion to protect the life and property of everyone living in East Pakistan [not Bangladesh!] whether Hindu or Muslim, Bengali or non-Bengali.

Mujib, who was earlier scheduled to lead a huge procession after the meeting, announced that the procession would not be held. Instead he led a prayer for the salvation of the departed souls of the martyrs who had, as he said, died in the struggle for democracy [not independence!]. No reason was offered for the postponement of the procession led by Mujib. This was a programme which Mujib himself announced the previous day. Could it be the case that Mujib wanted to dissociate from the independent Bangladesh memorandum of Shahjahan Siraj?

On 6 March, a group of artists and writers published a booklet called 'Pratiroth' (Resistance) and asked everyone to resist the repressions of the Martial law Administration and rise to the occasion for establishing an independent Bangladesh. They declared, "Set fire to any statement of compromise" (Aposher bani agune jalia dao).

On 7 March an organisation called 'the Co-ordination Committee of Communist Revolutionaries of East Bengal' issued a call for establishing independent East Bengal through armed struggle. On the same day, the National Awami Party (Muzaffar) published its 17-point constitutional proposal for Pakistan in which they demanded right to self-determination for East Pakistan along with the right to secede from the federation.

Next day, 8 March a left lenient students organisation 'Forward Students' Block' published a leaflet urging people not to cloud 'the rising sun of independence' by going in for any compromise with the Martial Law Administration and the ruling cliques. They also urged people to organise 'Bengal Liberation Front' in the rural and urban areas for establishing 'an independent socialist Bangladesh'. On the same day an anonymous leaflet was published in which various methods and rules of guerrilla warfare were explained.

On 9 March, the Central Committee of the East Pakistan Communist Party in a statement called upon the people to fight the enemy forces and to keep up the struggle for establishing an independent Bangladesh. On the same day, Maulana Bhashani issued a leaflet calling upon the people to join the struggle for preserving the independence of East Pakistan. He said that their only aim was the full independence and urged people to continue their struggle until that aim was achieved. He also warned against any attempt to compromise the independence of East Pakistan by coming into terms with the military elites.

On 10 March, while addressing a huge public meeting at Paltan Maidan Maulana Bhashani declared that no one would be able to suppress the struggle of 70 million Bengalis for freedom and liberation. He made it clear that in this respect, no compromise was possible. He called upon President Yahya to give freedom to 70 millions Bengalis. He even gave Yahya an ultimatum of 28 March 1971 to accept his demand.

On 11 March the Student Union (student wing of the Communist Party) called for the establishment of an exploitation free independent East Bengal. They also circulated leaflets about this.

On 17 March the Dhaka English daily 'The People' wrote, "Independence of Bangladesh a fait accompli".

On 19 March Bengali officers and soldiers of the East Bengal regiment stationed at Joydevpur revolted.

On 22 March EPR battalion in Chittagong led by Captain Rafiqul Islam arrested all the non-Bengali officers and soldiers of EPR. On the same day EPR captured the Chittagong port and tried to resist the unloading of Pakistan army's arms and ammunitions. The same day saw the slaughter of hundreds (one estimate says 1500) of Bengali officers and soldiers of East Bengal regiment at the East Bengal Regimental Centre in Chittagong by the Pakistan army.

The incidents mentioned above show that the campaign and actual war for independence had already started before 25 March although no formal declaration was made.

If a call for independence has been made on the 7th then the most logical follow up step should have been preparation for war – planning, organising, training etc. There is no evidence that Mujib or Awami League did anything to prepare the nation apart from shouting, " You get ready with whatever you have" on 7 March. They were themselves even not prepared for it. There was no strategy, no programmes.

Maulana Bhashani was very candid in his comments about the war preparation of Awami League leaders. Maulana said, "These fellows had already had their sherwanis tailored and were rehearsing for the oath-taking ceremony; these fellows had thought the power was in their pockets." (See Arun Mukerjee Dateline Mujibnagar). Maulana was always sceptical about the motives of the Pakistani authorities and did not believe that they would easily give the Bengalis share of power.

Communist Leader Abul Bashar said, "During 1971 when we urged people to take preparation for independence, then on 23 March Awami League observed 'Pakistan Day' and blamed us as secessionists."

Major Jalil's view was that Awami League leadership did not think of independence, they tried till the last moment to capture power through dialogue.

Even if there was a call for independence on the 7th, subsequent action or inaction by Mujib negated it. The speech was rather used to warn the Pakistani authorities that Mujib was the de facto ruler of the East and the only way to save the unity of Pakistan was to handover power to him. Mujib was probably right. However, this then run contrary to what has been said about Mujib's call for independence on 7 March.

Mujib's inclination to compromise should not surprise anyone. It was reported by The Dawn on 1 March 1971 that on 28 February, Mujib reiterated his assurance that six points would not be imposed on any one. This shows that he was ready to negotiate over them.

In his speech of 7 March Mujib said, "I made it clear that I could not agree to any deviation from the six points. That right rested with the people. Come, I said, let us sit down and resolve matters." One wonders if six points were not open to compromise why was Mujib asking the West Pakistanis to have discussion to settle the issues?

After his arrest when Mujib was taken to Pakistan, he allegedly said at the Karachi airport that he gave himself up to the Pakistani authorities to save Pakistan.

The US State Department's newly declassified documents about the 1971 Bangladesh War show that Mujib wanted to have a "form of confederation" with Pakistan rather than a separate country. When Bhutto released him from Pakistani prison in early January 1972, he apparently agreed to establish a confederation between Bangladesh and Pakistan. This was confirmed by Anthony Mascarenhas (Bangladesh: A Legacy of Blood). Mascarenhas spoke to Mujib in London after his return from Pakistan. Benazir Bhutto also said that her father and Mujib had an agreement to form a confederation.

It is the humble opinion of this writer that had the declaration of independence come earlier, may be soon after 7th March, things would probably have been different; the carnage of 25th March could have been avoided. The Pakistani army would not have the opportunity to strike the unarmed Bengalis as they did. The mass slaughter of Bengali troops in Cittagong, EPR in Pilkhana, Police offices at Rajarbag and university students and teachers could have been prevented. These forces could have come out of the barracks and dormitories and could resist the advances of the Pakistani troops. They could also disperse in the countryside and organise fight.

The first Bengal regiment stationed in Jessore was actually out of the cantonment on their winter exercise. They could have struck the enemy forces and continue fighting. As there was no declaration or direction given by Mujib, these troops remained inactive. After 25 March they were brought back to the cantonment, forced to surrender their arms and killed.

One should not forget that Mujib took it upon himself the responsibility of conducting the movement. On 7 March he urged, "Leave everything to me. I know how to organise a movement."

What was Mujib's personal relationship with Yahya Khan? While addressing the newly elected Awami League members at the Oath taking ceremony at the Ramna Race Course on 3 January 1971, Mujib thanked President Yahya for fulfilling his commitment in holding election. However, Mujib was worried that a section of Yahya's subordinates were conspiring to undo the election results. This news was published on the 4 January 1971 issue of the Pakistan Observer.

In one of the earlier meetings with Yahya, Mujib thanked Yahya personally for holding the election and even proposed to keep Yahya as the President after the handover of power, since Yahya had established democracy in Pakistan, democracy would be secured if he continued with the Presidency. (See Asghar Khan Generals in politics).

Yahya Khan also publicly declared Mujib as the future Prime Minister of Pakistan while talking to journalists in Dhaka. He also introduced Mujib to the Shah of Iran as the future Premier.

It appears that Mujib and Awami League leadership was convinced that Yahya Khan would transfer power to Mujib, and for that reason, they waited till the last moment and did not give up the hope. However, the fate dictated otherwise.

By going into an elaborate dialogue with Yahya and the Pakistani authorities and trying to devise a formula to keep Pakistan together they showed that independence of Bangladesh was probably not their main goal. There is also no evidence that they thought of any contingency plan should the dialogue fail to produce any results. Their action was contrary to the prevailing spirit of the country, which was overwhelmingly in favour of independence.

By the evening of 25 March 71, the emotional split with the West Pakistanis was complete; the country was ready to sever all formal ties with them and march ahead towards independence, but the question is whether the leader was ready for it?



__._,_.___


[* Moderator's Note - CHOTTALA is a non-profit, non-religious, non-political and non-discriminatory organization.

* Disclaimer: Any posting to the CHOTTALA are the opinion of the author. Authors of the messages to the CHOTTALA are responsible for the accuracy of their information and the conformance of their material with applicable copyright and other laws. Many people will read your post, and it will be archived for a very long time. The act of posting to the CHOTTALA indicates the subscriber's agreement to accept the adjudications of the moderator]




Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___

[chottala.com] আওয়ামী লীগ õ 9;াড়া সবাই ইউ 472;ূসকে সম্মা&# 2472; করে



 

আওয়ামী লীগ ছাড়া সবাই ইউনূসকে সম্মান করে

Mon 13 Aug 2012 10:54 PM BdST

rtnnগ্রামীণ ব্যাংকের প্রতিষ্ঠাতা ড. মুহাম্মদ ইউনূস বিতর্ক থামছে না। এর অবসান প্রত্যেকে চান। কিন্তু কোথায় তার অবসান কেউ বলতে পারছেন না। এতদিন ক্ষুদ্র ঋণের জনক হিসেবে ইউনূস পরিচিতি পেলেও তার চেয়ে বরং এ তকমা বেশি দাবি করেছেন অর্থমন্ত্রী আবুল মাল আব্দুল মুহিত। পরিস্থিতি এ পর্যায়ে পৌঁছেছে যে মার্কিন যুক্তরাষ্ট্রকে এ নিয়ে অবস্থান নিতে দেখা যাচ্ছে। যুক্তরাষ্ট্র গ্রামীণ ব্যাংক নিয়ে কি চায় তা এই গ্লোবাল ভিলেজের যুগে বলেও দিচ্ছে।

অন্যদিকে প্রধান বিরোধীদল বিএনপির পক্ষ থেকে বলা হচ্ছে ক্ষমতায় গেলে ইউনূসকে জাতীয়ভাবে স্বীকৃতি দেয়া হবে। পরিষ্কার হয়ে গেছে ইউনূস দেশের চেয়ে বরং আন্তর্জাতিক বিশ্বে বেশি জনপ্রিয় ও সম্মানিত। ড. মুহাম্মদ শহীদুল্লাহ বলে গেছেন, যে দেশ গুণীর কদর দিতে জানে না .......। তাহলে কি ইউনূস খ্যাতির বিড়ম্বনায় পড়ে গেছেন। ইউনূসকে নিয়ে তোমার কীর্তির চেয়ে তুমি যে মহৎ এ সম্ভাষণ করার ফুরসত হয়ত আমাদের এখনো আসেনি। কিন্তু তাকে নিয়ে বিতর্ক যেভাবে ছড়াচ্ছে তাতে বিষয়টি রাজনৈতিকভাবে সাংঘর্ষিক হয়ে উঠবে না তো।

এ বিষয়ে রিয়েল-টাইম নিউজ ডটকম-এর সাথে সাক্ষাতকারে বিশিষ্ট সাংবাদিক আমানুল্লাহ কবীর বলেছেন, ইউনূসকে নিয়ে বিতর্কের অবসান হওয়া জরুরি। কারণ তা দেশের জন্য ক্ষতিকর। বরং ইউনূসকে জাতীয় গর্ব বলে মনে করা উচিত।

প্রশ্ন: গ্রামীণ ব্যাংক ও ইউনূস বিতর্ক কিভাবে দেখছেন?

আমানুল্লাহ কবীর : সরকারের তরফ থেকে ড. মুহাম্মদ ইউনূসকে নিয়ে যে সমালোচনা শুরু হয়েছে তার কোনো ভিত্তি খুঁজে পাচ্ছি না। কেন সরকার বা প্রধানমন্ত্রী শেখ হাসিনা থেকে শুরু করে সবাই মিলে তার বিরুদ্ধে লেগেছে, একেবারে দলীয়ভাবে তার বিরুদ্ধে লাগার কারণ বুঝছি না। কিন্তু আমি একটা জিনিস বুঝি যে, গুণ এবং গুণীর কদর আওয়ামী লীগ দিতে জানে না। আওয়ামী লীগ জানে না বলেই আজকে এমন একটা বিতর্কের সৃষ্টি হয়েছে। এবং এই বিতর্ক আমাদের দেশের জন্যে ক্ষতিকর এই কারণে যে এখন পর্যন্ত এমন কোনো ব্যক্তি নেই যিনি বিতর্কের উর্ধ্বে আছেন। সবাইকে নিয়ে বিতর্ক রয়েছে বা বিতর্কের মধ্যে রয়েছেন।

ইউনূস নোবেল পুরস্কার পাওয়ার পর তাকে বিতর্কের উর্ধ্বে রাখার কথা। আমরা তা পারিনি। গ্রামীণ ব্যাংক ও ইউনূসের কারণে বিদেশে বাংলাদেশের এই যে ভাবমূর্তিটা তৈরি হয়েছে, তা কিন্তু এ বিতর্কে নষ্ট হচ্ছে। এবং এতে বিদেশি শক্তি বা বন্ধুগুলো খুবই ত্যক্ত বিরক্ত সরকারের ওপর। মার্কিন সিনেটররা প্রতিক্রিয়া দিচ্ছেন। ইউরোপীয় ইউনিয়নের প্রতিক্রিয়া দেখেছি। এ ধরনের প্রতিক্রিয়া কখনো ভাল হয়নি, খারাপই হয়েছে।

প্রশ্ন:
গ্রামীণ ব্যাংকের বিরুদ্ধে উচ্চ হারে সুদ নেয়া বা গরীবকে শোষণের কথা বলা হচ্ছে সরকারের তরফ থেকে, এ অভিযোগ সম্পর্কে আপনি কি বলবেন?

আমানুল্লাহ কবীর: বিবিসির সাথে প্রধানমন্ত্রী শেখ হাসিনা সাক্ষাতকারে গ্রামীণ ব্যাংকের উচ্চ হারে সুদের কথা বলার পর তার একটা ব্যাখ্যা কিন্তু প্রতিষ্ঠানটি দিয়েছে। গ্রামীণ ব্যাংক বলছে উচ্চ হারে সুদের অভিযোগ সঠিক নয়। তার সুদের হার ৫ ও ২০। আর তা চলছে সরকারের ব্যাংকিং বিধির আওতায়। গ্রামীণ ব্যাংক কেন্দ্রীয় ব্যাংকের নিয়ন্ত্রণে। গ্রামীণ ব্যাংক অতিরিক্ত হারে সুদ নিচ্ছে কি না তা দেখার বিষয়। এই যে ৪০, ৪৫ বা ৪৭ ভাগ হারে সুদের কথা বলা হচ্ছে তা কিন্তু গ্রামীণ ব্যাংক নিতে পারে না।

গ্রামীণ ব্যাংক একটা বিরাট কাজ করছে। এ ধরনের কাজ করতে গেলে ঘটনা বা দুর্ঘটনা ঘটতে পারে। কিন্তু সার্বিকভাবে পরিস্থিতি বিবেচনা করতে হবে। ক্ষুদ্র ঋণের কারণে গ্রামের নারীদের ক্ষমতায়ন হয়েছে। গ্রামের জনশক্তিতে পরিবর্তন হয়েছে তা সেখানে গেলে বোঝা যায়। এটাকে অস্বীকার করার উপায় নেই।

প্রশ্ন: সরকার যখন ক্ষুদ্র ঋণ বা উচ্চ হারে সুদের সমালোচনা করছে তাহলে এর বিকল্প কি করতে পারে?

আমানুল্লাহ কবীর: ক্ষুদ্র ঋণতো সরকার দেয় না। গ্রামীণ ব্যাংকে সরকারের একটা ক্ষুদ্র অংশীদারিত্ব আছে। কিন্তু মূল পরিকল্পনা বা তার বাস্তবায়ন করে থাকে গ্রামীণ ব্যাংকের ব্যবস্থাপনা পরিষদ। ড. মুহাম্মদ ইউনূসের নেতৃত্বে তা হয়ে থাকে। গ্রামীণ ক্ষুদ ঋণের প্রচলন করে তার বেনিফিট সাধারণ মানুষের কাছে পৌঁছে দিয়েছে। এখন সরকার যখন গ্রামীণ ব্যাংক নিয়ন্ত্রেণের চেষ্টা করছে তখন ঋণ গ্রহীতারা আপত্তি তুলেছে। তারা কিন্তু এটার বিরুদ্ধে দাঁড়িয়েছে। এসব ঋণ গ্রহীতাদের যেসব প্রতিনিধি ব্যবস্থাপনায় আছে তারাও এর বিরোধিতা করছে। অর্থাৎ গ্রামীণের বিকল্প কোনো ব্যবস্থা সরকার করতে পারবে না।

প্রশ্ন:
অভিযোগ উঠেছে আগামী নির্বাচনে গ্রামীণ ব্যাংক সরকারের বিরুদ্ধে একটা ভূমিকা নিয়ে অবতীর্ণ হতে পারে, রাজনৈতিকভাবে সাংঘর্ষিক হয়ে ওঠার ক্ষমতা কি এনজিওগুলোর রয়েছে কি না?

আমানুল্লাহ কবীর: প্রশিকা কিন্তু গত নির্বাচনে আওয়ামী লীগের পক্ষে কাজ করেছিল। এর বহু প্রমাণ পাওয়া গেছে, এ নিয়ে সন্দেহ নেই। কিন্তু গ্রামীণ ব্যাংক তা করবে বলে মনে হয় না। গ্রামীণ ব্যাংকের কাজের ধরন বা পরিচালনা অন্য রকমের। সুতরাং নির্বাচনে গ্রামীণ ব্যাংক কারো পক্ষ নিয়ে কাজ করবে এটা মনে হয় না।

তবে বিভিন্ন এনজিও যাদের নিরপেক্ষভাবে কাজ করার কথা তারা কিন্তু কোনো না কোনোভাবে রাজনীতির সাথে সম্পৃক্ত আছে। এখন সম্পৃক্ত হবার ফলে তাদের সামনে একটা খারাপ উদাহরণ হল এই যে, প্রশিকা কিন্তু রাজনৈতিকভাবে এক্সপোসড হয়ে গেল, পরবর্তীতে প্রশিকা কিন্তু আর ভাল করতে পারেনি। তাই ভবিষ্যতে মনে হয় না আরো কোনো এনজিও এধরনের প্রকাশ্য রাজনৈতিক লাইন গ্রহণ করবে।

প্রশ্ন: পদ্মা সেতু নিয়ে বিশ্ব ব্যাংকের ঋণ বাতিলের পেছনে ড. ইউনূসের হাত আছে এমন অভিযোগ উঠেছে। কি মনে করছেন আপনি এ বিষয়ে?

আমানুল্লাহ কবীর: এর কোনো গ্রহণযোগ্যতা নেই। ইউনূসকে এ জন্যে দোষারোপ করা চেষ্টা করা হচ্ছে, নিজেকে নির্দোষ প্রমাণের জন্যে। অর্থাৎ সরকার তার নিজের লোকদের নির্দোষ প্রমাণ করার জন্য ইউনূসের ঘাড়ে দায়-দায়িত্ব চাপানোর চেষ্টা করছে। এটা হচ্ছে মূল কারণ। ইউনূসের ঘাড়ে দায় চাপাতে পারলে নিজেরা ক্লিন হতে পারে। এক্ষেত্রে ইউনূস, যুক্তরাষ্ট্র বা বিশ্ব ব্যাংক নিজেদের অবস্থান পরিষ্কার করেছে।

প্রশ্ন: এখনতো ইউনূসের সম্পদের খোঁজ খবর নেয়া হচ্ছে, পাল্টা প্রশ্ন তুলেছেন কেউ কেউ নির্বাচনী ইশতেহার অনুসারে আওয়ামী লীগের মন্ত্রিসভার কেউ নিজেদের সম্পদের হিসাব দিচ্ছে না কেন?

আমানুল্লাহ কবীর: ইউনূসের সম্পদের খোঁজ নিতে গিয়ে দেখা গেছে তিনি সরকারের কাছে ১০ কোটি টাকা পান। ওয়েজ আর্নার হিসেবে বা নোবেল পুরস্কার আনার সময় তিনি ক্লিয়ারেন্স নিয়েছেন। পত্রিকায় প্রকাশ পেয়েছে এসব। তাকে ঝামেলায় ফেলতে এগুলো করা হচ্ছে। তাকে চরমভাবে হেনস্তা করার জন্যে এসব করা হচ্ছে।

আর সরকারের মন্ত্রিসভার সদস্যরা নিজেদের সম্পদের হিসেব দিলে তো ভাল উদাহরণ সৃষ্টি হত। তা করতে চাইলে সরকার ইউনূসের বিরুদ্ধে লাগবে কেন? ইউনূসকে জাতীয় গর্ব বলে মনে করা উচিত। বরং সরকার ইউনূসের ইমেজকে কাজে লাগিয়ে দেশের স্বার্থে তাকে ব্যবহার করতে পারত। সরকার নিজের ইমেজ বাড়াতে মন্ত্রিসভার সদস্যদের সম্পদের হিসেব দেবে এটা অতীতেও দেখিনি এখনো মনে হয় না দেখব। রাজনৈতিক দলগুলোর এ কালচারই নেই।

তারা অন্যের হিসেব চাইতে পারে। কিন্তু সত্যিকারভাবে নিজেদের হিসেব দিতে গেলে বহুজন ফেঁসে যাবে। অনেকের অদৃশ্য আয় বের হয়ে পড়বে।

প্রশ্ন:
অর্থমন্ত্রী যখন বলছেন, ইউনূস দেশের জন্য ক্ষতিকর প্রচারণা চালাচ্ছেন, বিরোধীদলীয় নেতা ব্যারিস্টার মওদুদ আহমদ তখন বলছেন, ইউনূসের অপমানের জবাব জনগণ ব্যালটে দেবে, এটা কি সম্ভব?

আমানুল্লাহ কবীর: অর্থমন্ত্রী খুব ক্ষুব্ধ হয়ে এমন মন্তব্য করেছেন। সরকারের মনোভাব ক্ষোভের মাধ্যমে তিনি প্রকাশ করেছেন। দেশের বিরুদ্ধে ইউনূস কোন প্রচারণাটা চালালেন? ইউনূস একজন ব্যক্তি, যার সারা বিশ্বে একটা ইমেজ রয়েছে, জনপ্রিয়তা ও পরিচিতি রয়েছে। এটা মুহিতের কিংবা আমাদের প্রধানমন্ত্রীরও নেই। এখন ইউনূসের জনপ্রিয়তার কারণে যদি কেউ ক্ষুব্ধ হয়ে থাকে, সেখানে তো ক্ষোভের বহিঃপ্রকাশ ঘটবেই। অর্থমন্ত্রী তাই করেছেন। তিনি সুস্থ হয়ে তা বলেননি, পত্রিকার রিপোর্টেও দেখবেন লেখা হয়েছে, তিনি ক্ষুব্ধ হয়ে বলেন......। গ্রামীণ ব্যাংক সরকার নিয়ন্ত্রণে নিচ্ছে এটা ঠিক। সরকার চেয়ারম্যান করে দেবে। সেই চেয়ারম্যান একটা প্যানেল করবেন। যে প্যানেল এমডি নিয়োগ দেবেন। এখন সরকার যদি চেয়ারম্যান করে দেয় তাহলে সেই চেয়ারম্যানের প্যানেলে কারা কারা থাকবেন তা বোঝা যাচ্ছে। আল্টিমেটলি সরকারের একজন লোককে গ্রামীণ ব্যাংকের এমডি করা হবে। এখন ইউনূস যদি এর বিরুদ্ধে কিছু বলে থাকেন তাহলে তা দেশের বিরুদ্ধে প্রচারণা হল কিভাবে?

আর ক্ষমতায় যেয়ে নয়, বিএনপির এখনি ইউনূসকে সম্মানিত ব্যক্তির মর্যাদা দেয়া উচিত। কারণ আওয়ামী লীগ ছাড়া দেশের সবাই ইউনূসকে জাতীয়ভাবে একজন সম্মানিত ব্যক্তি হিসেবে মনে করে।

রিয়েল-টাইম নিউজ ডটকম/বিশেষ প্রতিনিধি/আরআই_ ২২৫৫ ঘ.

 


__._,_.___


[* Moderator's Note - CHOTTALA is a non-profit, non-religious, non-political and non-discriminatory organization.

* Disclaimer: Any posting to the CHOTTALA are the opinion of the author. Authors of the messages to the CHOTTALA are responsible for the accuracy of their information and the conformance of their material with applicable copyright and other laws. Many people will read your post, and it will be archived for a very long time. The act of posting to the CHOTTALA indicates the subscriber's agreement to accept the adjudications of the moderator]




Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe

__,_._,___