Yes, that is right. Also, he did make his life easy and shake hand with
AL for his safe passage.
Bangladeshis demand trial of Gen (retd) Moeen U Ahmed
- Thread starter idune
- Start date
Yes, that is right. Also, he did make his life easy and shake hand with
AL for his safe passage.
TopCat
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2008
- Messages
- 15,736
- Reaction score
- -3
- Country
- Location
You are right. BNP used whole army, civil administration and state money for its formation as a party. AL just took a little favor from this little guy.. and nothing wrong with that I suppose... Take it easy and enjoy the finest government ever formed after 1947.
EyelessInGaza
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2009
- Messages
- 1,378
- Reaction score
- 0
From my outsider's perspective, it is impressive.
We South Asians are too willing to indulge in conspiracy theories. We forget that ACTIONS speak louder than WORDS.
In this specific case, the General's actions post retirement - THUS FAR - speak for themselves, despite what people claimed he would have done (fled to US, captured power, etc etc)
Al-zakir
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 3, 2008
- Messages
- 8,612
- Reaction score
- -8
- Country
- Location
Iajuddin was forced to promulgate emergency: Mukhles(Former adviser to Professor Dr Iazuddin)
1/11 is a black scar on the history of the nation. It pushed the country 20 years back
Tuesday January 12 2010 02:19:43 AM BDT
A former adviser to the immediate past President Professor Dr Iazuddin yesterday said that taking advantage of the rivalry among the political parties General Moeen U Ahmed and some ambitious military officers had held president Dr Iazuddin hostage under gun point and forced him to install a puppet government through promulgation of state of emergency on January 11, 2007.(The Independent)
Mukhles, press adviser to the former president was in Bangabhaban on January 11, 2007 when top army officers met the president, said this while addressing a discussion meeting in London to mark the third anniversary of the 1/11.
"1/11 is a black scar on the history of the nation. It pushed the country 20 years back. The puppet government comprised some persons who had foreign citizenship and they did not hesitate to take steps harming the interest of the country. The architects of the 1/11 destroyed all the key institutions of the country, and in the name of anti-corruption drive they snatched away human rights of the people", he said adding that they forcefully realized thousands of cores of Taka from businessmen and siphoned the money abroad.
He also alleged that during the period between October 28 of 2006 to January 11 of 2007, General Moeen made attempts to promulgate state of emergency thrice but those were foiled.
Mokhles said that General Moeen tried to promulgate Martial Law in the country by January 12, 2007 did not succeed.
"General Moeen forced the President to sign documents relating to promulgation of state of emergency arguing that there was provision in the constitution for emergency rule. General Moeen also ousted me from Bangabhaban without the permission of the President. I came under attack twice - on April 26 and on September 7 in 2007.
He alleged that the incident of 1/11 caused serious harm to the morale and professionalism of the army, which was used for serving personal interest
http://newsfrombangladesh.net/view.php?hidRecord=300534
1/11 is a black scar on the history of the nation. It pushed the country 20 years back
Tuesday January 12 2010 02:19:43 AM BDT
A former adviser to the immediate past President Professor Dr Iazuddin yesterday said that taking advantage of the rivalry among the political parties General Moeen U Ahmed and some ambitious military officers had held president Dr Iazuddin hostage under gun point and forced him to install a puppet government through promulgation of state of emergency on January 11, 2007.(The Independent)
Mukhles, press adviser to the former president was in Bangabhaban on January 11, 2007 when top army officers met the president, said this while addressing a discussion meeting in London to mark the third anniversary of the 1/11.
"1/11 is a black scar on the history of the nation. It pushed the country 20 years back. The puppet government comprised some persons who had foreign citizenship and they did not hesitate to take steps harming the interest of the country. The architects of the 1/11 destroyed all the key institutions of the country, and in the name of anti-corruption drive they snatched away human rights of the people", he said adding that they forcefully realized thousands of cores of Taka from businessmen and siphoned the money abroad.
He also alleged that during the period between October 28 of 2006 to January 11 of 2007, General Moeen made attempts to promulgate state of emergency thrice but those were foiled.
Mokhles said that General Moeen tried to promulgate Martial Law in the country by January 12, 2007 did not succeed.
"General Moeen forced the President to sign documents relating to promulgation of state of emergency arguing that there was provision in the constitution for emergency rule. General Moeen also ousted me from Bangabhaban without the permission of the President. I came under attack twice - on April 26 and on September 7 in 2007.
He alleged that the incident of 1/11 caused serious harm to the morale and professionalism of the army, which was used for serving personal interest
http://newsfrombangladesh.net/view.php?hidRecord=300534
Stumper
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2009
- Messages
- 1,226
- Reaction score
- 0
Al-Zakir: Were'nt you the one who asked for proof on one of the thread that discussed Musharaff's meeting with ULFA?
It's surprising you no longer ask for any proof but on contrary you want to readily believe at face value whatever this person alleges against your army chief.
Lets review what this guy is saying.
1.he says "Moeen did this at gun point and on 3 previous occasions" --- I say this is possible. Afterall , moeen agenda was to clean up the ***** in your political system. Moeen was quite vocal about what he wanted to achieve.
2.he has in past claimed that "Moeen did all this to get pseudo presidency." And when asked why? .... he says "to gain financial benefits and siphon the money abroad!"
... Fine Mr.Mukhles we will not ask you to prove it considering that you have good history behind you. But dont you think he could have better achieved this by directly assuming dictatorship role? ... That would have given him a clear road for misappropriation. But he didnt. Why did he instead open the gates for democratic election's and stop his potential source of income... Open to investigation by those very politicians whom he took to task during emergency.
Where are those businessman now that Mr.Moeen is not in power? Why dont this guys come out in open and claim back what was rightfully theirs and which was stolen from them by Moeen?
3)Mr.Mukhles has claimed threat from BD intelligence. Maybe true. But with Mr.Moeen out of the picture, why cant you come back to your country and take the matter to task in your country's court of law?
Awami League MP and ex minister Mohiuddin Khan Alamgir sharply criticized Moeen U Ahmed the ex aramy chief and his involvement in extorting hundred perhaps thousands of crore take from businessman during interim regime. Moeen U using brurtal military torture extorted these money. There are atleast 200+ crore taka what Moeen U and his loyal officers could not stole sitting in Bangladesh Bank. And officers who were involved with Moeen U, most of them still in service and forcing many decision of Awami regime. It has been well established fact that Moeen U activities were largely supported by indians. And oo the dismay of many awami leaders (including Hasina herself) and businessman who were victim of Moeen U led torture and extortion, Hasina entered deal with Moeen U that india brokered.
Report in Bangla:
.:. Welcome to SHEERSHANEWS.COM .:.
Report in Bangla:
.:. Welcome to SHEERSHANEWS.COM .:.
TopCat
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2008
- Messages
- 15,736
- Reaction score
- -3
- Country
- Location
Mukhles is my relative somway and I know what happend that particular day. For your inforamtion Muhkles was a third class journalist of Dinkal and used to live on bribes from various sources and had no quality whatsover to become the spokeperson of President (who himself was a looser). After Iazuddin took over the power of chief adviser, Mukhles suddently changed his attire and starting wearing suits and all and started talking to the media. In the meantime Iajudding gave away one of Dhaka's canal to his wife and also asked Mirza Aziz (the then Sonali Bank MD later became the finance advisor to CG) to authorize loan to his son. But Mirza Aziz declined and resigned from that post. Mukhles was behind all those in addition to other benifits he tried to secure in this short time span.
On the day of declaring emergency one major (Mukhles could not recall his name) gone to Banga Bhaban and wanted to meet President along with his other soldiers and Mukhles defied to let him talk to the president on the gate. The Major slapped him so hard that he spinned 5 times on the spot and ran away and he was never seen in the Banga Bhaban again. Thats the end of the Mukhles story.
Kit Over...
TopCat
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2008
- Messages
- 15,736
- Reaction score
- -3
- Country
- Location
He was indicted 13 years of prisonment for corruption. Thats why he was not given any ministry this time around. He will allege MUA naturally like any others who were exposed during MUAs tenure.
Since when this AL criminal thief M.K. Alamgir has become your Jamaati Peer? You must be very naive to tell us that because this M.K Alamgir belongs to AL and criticizes General Moeen, therefore, the latter is a criminal. Since when you have become also an AL supporter? Shame on you.
Everyone knows that M.K criticizes him only because he was put into jail during the military rule, isn't it? His illegal properties were also seized at that time. But, now this thief has suddenly become your Jamaati Guru only because he criticized Gen. Moeen. What a worshipping!
This is the second time I have seen you referring to M.K to make a point against Gen. Moeen. How long the razakars would spit towards the sky? M.K stole may be only 1% of what Tareq Rahman stole, but, even then, he was a thief. A patriot must criticize both. But, of course, the razakar collaborators are not patriots.
General Moeen saved the country from people like M.K, Tareq and Kokko.
If I can recall correctly, then he was Major General Masud (uddin?), who was later sent as an ambassador to Australia. He did not want a transfer of power to the bloody civilians, but Gen. Moeen wanted.
Note that a Major cannot demand an appointment with the President of the Republic.
TopCat
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2008
- Messages
- 15,736
- Reaction score
- -3
- Country
- Location
No it was a junior officer. None of the general gone to Bangabhaban that day. Eeven DGFI was not informed.
I cannot be sure about what you are stating. It is only because an army Major cannot just go and seek an appointment with the President. A person needs a prior appointment to see him. At a time when the country was in turmoil with the political parties bickering at each other, is it the duty of a junior military officer to talk with the President?
However, the scenerio may be changed as below:
1) General Masud was seeking an appointment on the phone.
2) But, people like Mukhles was denying it.
3) The Generals sent one Major to the President's office to seek an appointment with the President.
4) Mukhles denied to confirm an appointment.
5) This made the Major angry with a bloody civilian and slapped him on the face.
The scenerio above is possible, but, under no circumstances an army Major would be given authority by his superiors to go and meet the President unilaterally. It is against the protocoal.
It could also happen that General Masud and Co. went to the President's office to meet him without a prior appointment. But, Mukhles denied an on the spot appointment, and so a Major accompanying him slapped Mukhless on the face. I hve heard Gen. Masud is a no-nonsense strong-minded person.
Whatever may be the scenerio, there was a slapping no doubt. I have also heard about it sometime during the first month of military rule.
On the 1/11 Episode in Bangladesh
By Dr. K. M. A. Malik ( UK )
Renata Lok Dessallien, who served as the UN Resident Coordinator in Dhaka for more than three years, have once again come into media limelight because of her attempts to dissociate the UN and herself from the traumatic January 11, 2007 (the so-called 1/11) episode in Bangladesh. On this day the then President of the country, Iajuddin Ahmed, was compelled by a group of top level army officers to postpone the national elections scheduled for January 22, 2007 and declare a State of Emergency. This led to an unelected and unconstitutional Caretaker Government (CTG) with a former World Bank official Dr. Fakhruddin Ahmed as the Chief Adviser, but the Army Chief General Moeen holding the real power, ruled the country for about two years.
This period witnessed a very tragic period in Bangladesh history, full of controversies to break up the two largest political parties (BNP and AL), remove their top leaders and remodel Bangladesh political landscape to suit foreign and local vested interests. The country not only went through a severe crisis in political uncertainty and turmoil, but also it paved the way for greater imperialist and hegemonic penetration and control. The economy was nearly ruined. About 70 thousand political workers at grass-root level were arbitrarily put into prison without trial. Top political leaders including two former prime ministers as well as many businessmen were imprisoned on charges of corruption. The country also witnessed the worst period of human rights violations including arbitrary arrests, torture and the killings of suspected criminals under custody.
That a few top army officers headed by General Moeen U Ahmed had conspired for a long time before 1/11 to grab power with the help and connivance of the imperialist powers and their cohorts in international bodies such as the UN was not initially understood by the common people. A serious propaganda offensive was launched to denigrate the political process and glorify the 1/11 change. Only a handful of people could see the hidden agenda behind the event instigated by some foreign powers. Fortunately, most people became gradually aware of the ill motives of General Moeen to de-politicise Bangladesh and to become its new saviour with imperialist and hegemonic backing.
Faced with country-wide opposition and protests, and also because of the waning support from the foreign powers, Moeen had to abandon his personal agenda. His talk of introducing a new brand of democracy was universally condemned and his links with foreign powers became totally exposed. Finally, general elections were held at the end of December 2008, which brought Sheikh Hasinas Awami League and allies into power. There were serious allegations of violations of electoral rules, rigging and understanding between General Moeen and Sheikh Hasina (as confirmed by General Ershad and Abdul Jalil), but the opposition accepted the reality considering that a faulty elected government is better than any unelected, military-led regime.
General Moeen is now a discredited name in Bangladesh , not only because of his personal ambition to become a little Caesar, but also for his deceptive and conspiratorial role to denigrate and subvert the democratic political process by using some elements within the army (especially the DGFI). His role in the BDR massacre on February 25-26, 2008, has also come under serious questions.
Moeen had earlier justified his intervention in the 1/11 episode by saying that it was the threat from the UN that prompted him to request the President to postpone the proposed elections on January 22, 2007, and to declare the State of Emergency . He also denied that he had any personal ambition to become the new ruler. He put the blame squarely on the UN intervention.
The out-going UN official now denies any involvement of the world body in the disastrous 1/11 episode. In a pre-departure interview with UNB, she said, "International community including the UN did not interfere in any way. Our only concern was to create conditions conducive to holding free and fair elections."
She does not agree with General Moeens contention that he received letters from the UN to the effect that the Bangladesh army personnel would lose jobs in the UN peacekeeping mission if the army plays any role in the proposed parliamentary polls on January 22, 2007. "This was never discussed," she asserted.
Renata Dessalliens denial has provoked severe criticism and some analysts have also called her a liar. Reports in several newspapers make it very clear that the UN played a crucial role in effecting the 1/11 episode, and that Renata Lok Dessallien as the UNDP representative and resident coordinator of the UN was directly involved with the then Army Chief General Moeen in the conspiracy.
An editorial in the prestigious daily New Age [April 19, 2010] has termed Ms Renata Lok-Dessalliens latest statement as more than a travesty of truth; it is an affront to the peoples intelligence. I include the following extracts from the editorial since, in my opinion, this is an excellent analysis on the role played by the UN and several foreign diplomats in the 1/11 episode.
The editorial says, on the very day that a state of emergency was declared, i.e. January 11, 2007, her office circulated a media release that said should the 22 January Parliamentary Elections proceed without participation of all major political parties, deployment of Armed Forces in support of the election process raises question. This may have implications for Bangladesh s future role in UN Peacekeeping Operations.
The media release also said: United Nations Under-Secretary-Generals Mr. Ibrahim Gambari and Mr. Jean-Marie Guehno of the Department of Political Affairs and the Department of Peacekeeping Operations respectively, will be contacting Bangladeshs Political, Caretaker Government and Military leaders tonight in this regard. Evidently, there was clear indication in the media release of impending communication between the UN and the then Bangladesh government.
Dessalliens claim that the international community, including the UN, did not interfere in any way cannot be any farther from truth, either; in the lead-up to the January 11, 2007 changeover, there were heightened activities by the diplomats of certain countries and she was very much in the forefront of the so-called mediation, during which the mediators even went to the Dhaka Cantonment to meet the then chief of army staff. These mediators did not even bother to keep their errands, which, needless to say, were in contravention of all diplomatic norms and international conventions guiding relations between states; they confronted the media, both electronic and print, with regular updates. Surely, Dessallien cannot say her involvement in the mediation was of her own volition; she did represent the United Nations and there were no two ways about it.
The timing of her claim is also intriguing, came as it did on the eve of her departure upon conclusion of her controversial assignment in Bangladesh . Over the past three years or so, she apparently did not deem it necessary to come up with such a disclaimer, although a section of the media consistently criticised the unwarranted interference by certain diplomats and UN officials in the countrys internal affairs. She also did not bother to come up with a rejoinder to the claim of the former army chief, made in his memoir, that Guenho had called him to say that the UN will consider with due importance the withdrawal of the Bangladesh Army from the UN peacekeeping mission should the army play any role in the eventually-cancelled January 22 elections.
Overall, right from the start and till the very end of her tenure, Dessallien looks to have indulged in falsehood and deceit, which is unbecoming of a UN official and for which the incumbent elected government should have declared her person non grata, all the more so because her antics and those of the diplomats had brought upon the country two years of misrule by a band of apolitical individuals, the cost of which the nation is still paying and may have to pay for years to come.
Regrettably, the Awami League-led government has thus far shown a curious reticence about bringing the proponents and exponents of the interim government, onstage and backstage, to task for their misadventure. The only solace for the people seems to be that they may have seen the last of Dessallien. Meanwhile, now that she has made the claim, the UN owes the people of Bangladesh some clarification.
Before concluding this essay, it is important to draw attention to the destructive internal divisions that facilitate the interference of foreign powers in the countrys internal affairs. They take advantage of internal discords and impose their will on the countrys politics, economy, administration, defence and other affairs. Divide and Rule is a convenient tool in hands of imperialists and hegemons.
The tragedy is that our rulers are short-sighted, incompetent and interested more in grabbing and holding power than in serving the true interests of the people. Since most of them can be easily bought and sold, they have a subservient mentality and depend on the advice of foreign friends rather than on the support of the common people. During the days leading to 1/11, we witnessed the shameful *** race of many front-line leaders of AL, BNP, Jatio Party and Jamat-e-Islami to visit the US, British, EU, Indian, Australian diplomats to solicit support, whilst refusing to conduct any dialogue and negotiations among themselves to resolve national issues. We can blame the outsiders for interference but we must also accept our own part in facilitating the context for their intervention. (April 21, 2010).
By Dr. K. M. A. Malik ( UK )
Renata Lok Dessallien, who served as the UN Resident Coordinator in Dhaka for more than three years, have once again come into media limelight because of her attempts to dissociate the UN and herself from the traumatic January 11, 2007 (the so-called 1/11) episode in Bangladesh. On this day the then President of the country, Iajuddin Ahmed, was compelled by a group of top level army officers to postpone the national elections scheduled for January 22, 2007 and declare a State of Emergency. This led to an unelected and unconstitutional Caretaker Government (CTG) with a former World Bank official Dr. Fakhruddin Ahmed as the Chief Adviser, but the Army Chief General Moeen holding the real power, ruled the country for about two years.
This period witnessed a very tragic period in Bangladesh history, full of controversies to break up the two largest political parties (BNP and AL), remove their top leaders and remodel Bangladesh political landscape to suit foreign and local vested interests. The country not only went through a severe crisis in political uncertainty and turmoil, but also it paved the way for greater imperialist and hegemonic penetration and control. The economy was nearly ruined. About 70 thousand political workers at grass-root level were arbitrarily put into prison without trial. Top political leaders including two former prime ministers as well as many businessmen were imprisoned on charges of corruption. The country also witnessed the worst period of human rights violations including arbitrary arrests, torture and the killings of suspected criminals under custody.
That a few top army officers headed by General Moeen U Ahmed had conspired for a long time before 1/11 to grab power with the help and connivance of the imperialist powers and their cohorts in international bodies such as the UN was not initially understood by the common people. A serious propaganda offensive was launched to denigrate the political process and glorify the 1/11 change. Only a handful of people could see the hidden agenda behind the event instigated by some foreign powers. Fortunately, most people became gradually aware of the ill motives of General Moeen to de-politicise Bangladesh and to become its new saviour with imperialist and hegemonic backing.
Faced with country-wide opposition and protests, and also because of the waning support from the foreign powers, Moeen had to abandon his personal agenda. His talk of introducing a new brand of democracy was universally condemned and his links with foreign powers became totally exposed. Finally, general elections were held at the end of December 2008, which brought Sheikh Hasinas Awami League and allies into power. There were serious allegations of violations of electoral rules, rigging and understanding between General Moeen and Sheikh Hasina (as confirmed by General Ershad and Abdul Jalil), but the opposition accepted the reality considering that a faulty elected government is better than any unelected, military-led regime.
General Moeen is now a discredited name in Bangladesh , not only because of his personal ambition to become a little Caesar, but also for his deceptive and conspiratorial role to denigrate and subvert the democratic political process by using some elements within the army (especially the DGFI). His role in the BDR massacre on February 25-26, 2008, has also come under serious questions.
Moeen had earlier justified his intervention in the 1/11 episode by saying that it was the threat from the UN that prompted him to request the President to postpone the proposed elections on January 22, 2007, and to declare the State of Emergency . He also denied that he had any personal ambition to become the new ruler. He put the blame squarely on the UN intervention.
The out-going UN official now denies any involvement of the world body in the disastrous 1/11 episode. In a pre-departure interview with UNB, she said, "International community including the UN did not interfere in any way. Our only concern was to create conditions conducive to holding free and fair elections."
She does not agree with General Moeens contention that he received letters from the UN to the effect that the Bangladesh army personnel would lose jobs in the UN peacekeeping mission if the army plays any role in the proposed parliamentary polls on January 22, 2007. "This was never discussed," she asserted.
Renata Dessalliens denial has provoked severe criticism and some analysts have also called her a liar. Reports in several newspapers make it very clear that the UN played a crucial role in effecting the 1/11 episode, and that Renata Lok Dessallien as the UNDP representative and resident coordinator of the UN was directly involved with the then Army Chief General Moeen in the conspiracy.
An editorial in the prestigious daily New Age [April 19, 2010] has termed Ms Renata Lok-Dessalliens latest statement as more than a travesty of truth; it is an affront to the peoples intelligence. I include the following extracts from the editorial since, in my opinion, this is an excellent analysis on the role played by the UN and several foreign diplomats in the 1/11 episode.
The editorial says, on the very day that a state of emergency was declared, i.e. January 11, 2007, her office circulated a media release that said should the 22 January Parliamentary Elections proceed without participation of all major political parties, deployment of Armed Forces in support of the election process raises question. This may have implications for Bangladesh s future role in UN Peacekeeping Operations.
The media release also said: United Nations Under-Secretary-Generals Mr. Ibrahim Gambari and Mr. Jean-Marie Guehno of the Department of Political Affairs and the Department of Peacekeeping Operations respectively, will be contacting Bangladeshs Political, Caretaker Government and Military leaders tonight in this regard. Evidently, there was clear indication in the media release of impending communication between the UN and the then Bangladesh government.
Dessalliens claim that the international community, including the UN, did not interfere in any way cannot be any farther from truth, either; in the lead-up to the January 11, 2007 changeover, there were heightened activities by the diplomats of certain countries and she was very much in the forefront of the so-called mediation, during which the mediators even went to the Dhaka Cantonment to meet the then chief of army staff. These mediators did not even bother to keep their errands, which, needless to say, were in contravention of all diplomatic norms and international conventions guiding relations between states; they confronted the media, both electronic and print, with regular updates. Surely, Dessallien cannot say her involvement in the mediation was of her own volition; she did represent the United Nations and there were no two ways about it.
The timing of her claim is also intriguing, came as it did on the eve of her departure upon conclusion of her controversial assignment in Bangladesh . Over the past three years or so, she apparently did not deem it necessary to come up with such a disclaimer, although a section of the media consistently criticised the unwarranted interference by certain diplomats and UN officials in the countrys internal affairs. She also did not bother to come up with a rejoinder to the claim of the former army chief, made in his memoir, that Guenho had called him to say that the UN will consider with due importance the withdrawal of the Bangladesh Army from the UN peacekeeping mission should the army play any role in the eventually-cancelled January 22 elections.
Overall, right from the start and till the very end of her tenure, Dessallien looks to have indulged in falsehood and deceit, which is unbecoming of a UN official and for which the incumbent elected government should have declared her person non grata, all the more so because her antics and those of the diplomats had brought upon the country two years of misrule by a band of apolitical individuals, the cost of which the nation is still paying and may have to pay for years to come.
Regrettably, the Awami League-led government has thus far shown a curious reticence about bringing the proponents and exponents of the interim government, onstage and backstage, to task for their misadventure. The only solace for the people seems to be that they may have seen the last of Dessallien. Meanwhile, now that she has made the claim, the UN owes the people of Bangladesh some clarification.
Before concluding this essay, it is important to draw attention to the destructive internal divisions that facilitate the interference of foreign powers in the countrys internal affairs. They take advantage of internal discords and impose their will on the countrys politics, economy, administration, defence and other affairs. Divide and Rule is a convenient tool in hands of imperialists and hegemons.
The tragedy is that our rulers are short-sighted, incompetent and interested more in grabbing and holding power than in serving the true interests of the people. Since most of them can be easily bought and sold, they have a subservient mentality and depend on the advice of foreign friends rather than on the support of the common people. During the days leading to 1/11, we witnessed the shameful *** race of many front-line leaders of AL, BNP, Jatio Party and Jamat-e-Islami to visit the US, British, EU, Indian, Australian diplomats to solicit support, whilst refusing to conduct any dialogue and negotiations among themselves to resolve national issues. We can blame the outsiders for interference but we must also accept our own part in facilitating the context for their intervention. (April 21, 2010).
1/11 Episode in Bangladesh: Renata Lok Dessallien on the denial mode
By Dr. K. M. A. Malik (UK):
Renata Lok Dessallien, who served as the UN Resident Coordinator in Dhaka for more than three years, have once again come into media limelight because of her attempts to dissociate the UN and herself from the traumatic January 11, 2007 (the so-called 1/11) episode in Bangladesh. On this day the then President of the country, Iajuddin Ahmed, was compelled by a group of top level army officers to postpone the national elections scheduled for January 22, 2007 and declare a State of Emergency. This led to an unelected and unconstitutional Caretaker Government (CTG) with a former World Bank official Dr. Fakhruddin Ahmed as the Chief Adviser, but the Army Chief General Moeen holding the real power, ruled the country for about two years.
This period witnessed a very tragic period in Bangladesh history, full of controversies to break up the two largest political parties (BNP and AL), remove their top leaders and remodel Bangladesh political landscape to suit foreign and local vested interests. The country not only went through a severe crisis in political uncertainty and turmoil, but also it paved the way for greater imperialist and hegemonic penetration and control. The economy was nearly ruined. About 70 thousand political workers at grass-root level were arbitrarily put into prison without trial. Top political leaders including two former prime ministers as well as many businessmen were imprisoned on charges of corruption. The country also witnessed the worst period of human rights violations including arbitrary arrests, torture and the killings of suspected criminals under custody.
That a few top army officers headed by General Moeen U Ahmed had conspired for a long time before 1/11 to grab power with the help and connivance of the imperialist powers and their cohorts in international bodies such as the UN was not initially understood by the common people. A serious propaganda offensive was launched to denigrate the political process and glorify the 1/11 change. Only a handful of people could see the hidden agenda behind the event instigated by some foreign powers. Fortunately, most people became gradually aware of the ill motives of General Moeen to de-politicise Bangladesh and to become its new saviour with imperialist and hegemonic backing.
Faced with country-wide opposition and protests, and also because of the waning support from the foreign powers, Moeen had to abandon his personal agenda. His talk of introducing a new brand of democracy was universally condemned and his links with foreign powers became totally exposed. Finally, general elections were held at the end of December 2008, which brought Sheikh Hasinas Awami League and allies into power. There were serious allegations of violations of electoral rules, rigging and understanding between General Moeen and Sheikh Hasina (as confirmed by General Ershad and Abdul Jalil), but the opposition accepted the reality considering that a faulty elected government is better than any unelected, military-led regime.
General Moeen is now a discredited name in Bangladesh, not only because of his personal ambition to become a little Caesar, but also for his deceptive and conspiratorial role to denigrate and subvert the democratic political process by using some elements within the army (especially the DGFI). His role in the BDR massacre on February 25-26, 2008, has also come under serious questions.
Moeen had earlier justified his intervention in the 1/11 episode by saying that it was the threat from the UN that prompted him to request the President to postpone the proposed elections on January 22, 2007, and to declare the State of Emergency. He also denied that he had any personal ambition to become the new ruler. He put the blame squarely on the UN intervention.
The out-going UN official now denies any involvement of the world body in the disastrous 1/11 episode. In a pre-departure interview with UNB, she said, International community including the UN did not interfere in any way. Our only concern was to create conditions conducive to holding free and fair elections.
She does not agree with General Moeens contention that he received letters from the UN to the effect that the Bangladesh army personnel would lose jobs in the UN peacekeeping mission if the army plays any role in the proposed parliamentary polls on January 22, 2007. This was never discussed, she asserted.
Renata Dessalliens denial has provoked severe criticism and some analysts have also called her a liar. Reports in several newspapers make it very clear that the UN played a crucial role in effecting the 1/11 episode, and that Renata Lok Dessallien as the UNDP representative and resident coordinator of the UN was directly involved with the then Army Chief General Moeen in the conspiracy.
An editorial in the prestigious daily New Age [April 19, 2010] has termed Ms Renata Lok-Dessalliens latest statement as more than a travesty of truth; it is an affront to the peoples intelligence. I include the following extracts from the editorial since, in my opinion, this is an excellent analysis on the role played by the UN and several foreign diplomats in the 1/11 episode.
The editorial says, on the very day that a state of emergency was declared, i.e. January 11, 2007, her office circulated a media release that said should the 22 January Parliamentary Elections proceed without participation of all major political parties, deployment of Armed Forces in support of the election process raises question. This may have implications for Bangladeshs future role in UN Peacekeeping Operations.
The media release also said: United Nations Under-Secretary-Generals Mr. Ibrahim Gambari and Mr. Jean-Marie Guehno of the Department of Political Affairs and the Department of Peacekeeping Operations respectively, will be contacting Bangladeshs Political, Caretaker Government and Military leaders tonight in this regard. Evidently, there was clear indication in the media release of impending communication between the UN and the then Bangladesh government.
Dessalliens claim that the international community, including the UN, did not interfere in any way cannot be any farther from truth, either; in the lead-up to the January 11, 2007 changeover, there were heightened activities by the diplomats of certain countries and she was very much in the forefront of the so-called mediation, during which the mediators even went to the Dhaka Cantonment to meet the then chief of army staff. These mediators did not even bother to keep their errands, which, needless to say, were in contravention of all diplomatic norms and international conventions guiding relations between states; they confronted the media, both electronic and print, with regular updates. Surely, Dessallien cannot say her involvement in the mediation was of her own volition; she did represent the United Nations and there were no two ways about it.
The timing of her claim is also intriguing, came as it did on the eve of her departure upon conclusion of her controversial assignment in Bangladesh. Over the past three years or so, she apparently did not deem it necessary to come up with such a disclaimer, although a section of the media consistently criticised the unwarranted interference by certain diplomats and UN officials in the countrys internal affairs. She also did not bother to come up with a rejoinder to the claim of the former army chief, made in his memoir, that Guenho had called him to say that the UN will consider with due importance the withdrawal of the Bangladesh Army from the UN peacekeeping mission should the army play any role in the eventually-cancelled January 22 elections.
Overall, right from the start and till the very end of her tenure, Dessallien looks to have indulged in falsehood and deceit, which is unbecoming of a UN official and for which the incumbent elected government should have declared her person non grata, all the more so because her antics and those of the diplomats had brought upon the country two years of misrule by a band of apolitical individuals, the cost of which the nation is still paying and may have to pay for years to come.
Regrettably, the Awami League-led government has thus far shown a curious reticence about bringing the proponents and exponents of the interim government, onstage and backstage, to task for their misadventure. The only solace for the people seems to be that they may have seen the last of Dessallien. Meanwhile, now that she has made the claim, the UN owes the people of Bangladesh some clarification.
Before concluding this essay, it is important to draw attention to the destructive internal divisions that facilitate the interference of foreign powers in the countrys internal affairs. They take advantage of internal discords and impose their will on the countrys politics, economy, administration, defence and other affairs. Divide and Rule is a convenient tool in hands of imperialists and hegemons.
The tragedy is that our rulers are short-sighted, incompetent and interested more in grabbing and holding power than in serving the true interests of the people. Since most of them can be easily bought and sold, they have a subservient mentality and depend on the advice of foreign friends rather than on the support of the common people. During the days leading to 1/11, we witnessed the shameful *** race of many front-line leaders of AL, BNP, Jatio Party and Jamat-e-Islami to visit the US, British, EU, Indian, Australian diplomats to solicit support, whilst refusing to conduct any dialogue and negotiations among themselves to resolve national issues. We can blame the outsiders for interference but we must also accept our own part in facilitating the context for their intervention. (April 21, 2010).
By Dr. K. M. A. Malik (UK):
Renata Lok Dessallien, who served as the UN Resident Coordinator in Dhaka for more than three years, have once again come into media limelight because of her attempts to dissociate the UN and herself from the traumatic January 11, 2007 (the so-called 1/11) episode in Bangladesh. On this day the then President of the country, Iajuddin Ahmed, was compelled by a group of top level army officers to postpone the national elections scheduled for January 22, 2007 and declare a State of Emergency. This led to an unelected and unconstitutional Caretaker Government (CTG) with a former World Bank official Dr. Fakhruddin Ahmed as the Chief Adviser, but the Army Chief General Moeen holding the real power, ruled the country for about two years.
This period witnessed a very tragic period in Bangladesh history, full of controversies to break up the two largest political parties (BNP and AL), remove their top leaders and remodel Bangladesh political landscape to suit foreign and local vested interests. The country not only went through a severe crisis in political uncertainty and turmoil, but also it paved the way for greater imperialist and hegemonic penetration and control. The economy was nearly ruined. About 70 thousand political workers at grass-root level were arbitrarily put into prison without trial. Top political leaders including two former prime ministers as well as many businessmen were imprisoned on charges of corruption. The country also witnessed the worst period of human rights violations including arbitrary arrests, torture and the killings of suspected criminals under custody.
That a few top army officers headed by General Moeen U Ahmed had conspired for a long time before 1/11 to grab power with the help and connivance of the imperialist powers and their cohorts in international bodies such as the UN was not initially understood by the common people. A serious propaganda offensive was launched to denigrate the political process and glorify the 1/11 change. Only a handful of people could see the hidden agenda behind the event instigated by some foreign powers. Fortunately, most people became gradually aware of the ill motives of General Moeen to de-politicise Bangladesh and to become its new saviour with imperialist and hegemonic backing.
Faced with country-wide opposition and protests, and also because of the waning support from the foreign powers, Moeen had to abandon his personal agenda. His talk of introducing a new brand of democracy was universally condemned and his links with foreign powers became totally exposed. Finally, general elections were held at the end of December 2008, which brought Sheikh Hasinas Awami League and allies into power. There were serious allegations of violations of electoral rules, rigging and understanding between General Moeen and Sheikh Hasina (as confirmed by General Ershad and Abdul Jalil), but the opposition accepted the reality considering that a faulty elected government is better than any unelected, military-led regime.
General Moeen is now a discredited name in Bangladesh, not only because of his personal ambition to become a little Caesar, but also for his deceptive and conspiratorial role to denigrate and subvert the democratic political process by using some elements within the army (especially the DGFI). His role in the BDR massacre on February 25-26, 2008, has also come under serious questions.
Moeen had earlier justified his intervention in the 1/11 episode by saying that it was the threat from the UN that prompted him to request the President to postpone the proposed elections on January 22, 2007, and to declare the State of Emergency. He also denied that he had any personal ambition to become the new ruler. He put the blame squarely on the UN intervention.
The out-going UN official now denies any involvement of the world body in the disastrous 1/11 episode. In a pre-departure interview with UNB, she said, International community including the UN did not interfere in any way. Our only concern was to create conditions conducive to holding free and fair elections.
She does not agree with General Moeens contention that he received letters from the UN to the effect that the Bangladesh army personnel would lose jobs in the UN peacekeeping mission if the army plays any role in the proposed parliamentary polls on January 22, 2007. This was never discussed, she asserted.
Renata Dessalliens denial has provoked severe criticism and some analysts have also called her a liar. Reports in several newspapers make it very clear that the UN played a crucial role in effecting the 1/11 episode, and that Renata Lok Dessallien as the UNDP representative and resident coordinator of the UN was directly involved with the then Army Chief General Moeen in the conspiracy.
An editorial in the prestigious daily New Age [April 19, 2010] has termed Ms Renata Lok-Dessalliens latest statement as more than a travesty of truth; it is an affront to the peoples intelligence. I include the following extracts from the editorial since, in my opinion, this is an excellent analysis on the role played by the UN and several foreign diplomats in the 1/11 episode.
The editorial says, on the very day that a state of emergency was declared, i.e. January 11, 2007, her office circulated a media release that said should the 22 January Parliamentary Elections proceed without participation of all major political parties, deployment of Armed Forces in support of the election process raises question. This may have implications for Bangladeshs future role in UN Peacekeeping Operations.
The media release also said: United Nations Under-Secretary-Generals Mr. Ibrahim Gambari and Mr. Jean-Marie Guehno of the Department of Political Affairs and the Department of Peacekeeping Operations respectively, will be contacting Bangladeshs Political, Caretaker Government and Military leaders tonight in this regard. Evidently, there was clear indication in the media release of impending communication between the UN and the then Bangladesh government.
Dessalliens claim that the international community, including the UN, did not interfere in any way cannot be any farther from truth, either; in the lead-up to the January 11, 2007 changeover, there were heightened activities by the diplomats of certain countries and she was very much in the forefront of the so-called mediation, during which the mediators even went to the Dhaka Cantonment to meet the then chief of army staff. These mediators did not even bother to keep their errands, which, needless to say, were in contravention of all diplomatic norms and international conventions guiding relations between states; they confronted the media, both electronic and print, with regular updates. Surely, Dessallien cannot say her involvement in the mediation was of her own volition; she did represent the United Nations and there were no two ways about it.
The timing of her claim is also intriguing, came as it did on the eve of her departure upon conclusion of her controversial assignment in Bangladesh. Over the past three years or so, she apparently did not deem it necessary to come up with such a disclaimer, although a section of the media consistently criticised the unwarranted interference by certain diplomats and UN officials in the countrys internal affairs. She also did not bother to come up with a rejoinder to the claim of the former army chief, made in his memoir, that Guenho had called him to say that the UN will consider with due importance the withdrawal of the Bangladesh Army from the UN peacekeeping mission should the army play any role in the eventually-cancelled January 22 elections.
Overall, right from the start and till the very end of her tenure, Dessallien looks to have indulged in falsehood and deceit, which is unbecoming of a UN official and for which the incumbent elected government should have declared her person non grata, all the more so because her antics and those of the diplomats had brought upon the country two years of misrule by a band of apolitical individuals, the cost of which the nation is still paying and may have to pay for years to come.
Regrettably, the Awami League-led government has thus far shown a curious reticence about bringing the proponents and exponents of the interim government, onstage and backstage, to task for their misadventure. The only solace for the people seems to be that they may have seen the last of Dessallien. Meanwhile, now that she has made the claim, the UN owes the people of Bangladesh some clarification.
Before concluding this essay, it is important to draw attention to the destructive internal divisions that facilitate the interference of foreign powers in the countrys internal affairs. They take advantage of internal discords and impose their will on the countrys politics, economy, administration, defence and other affairs. Divide and Rule is a convenient tool in hands of imperialists and hegemons.
The tragedy is that our rulers are short-sighted, incompetent and interested more in grabbing and holding power than in serving the true interests of the people. Since most of them can be easily bought and sold, they have a subservient mentality and depend on the advice of foreign friends rather than on the support of the common people. During the days leading to 1/11, we witnessed the shameful *** race of many front-line leaders of AL, BNP, Jatio Party and Jamat-e-Islami to visit the US, British, EU, Indian, Australian diplomats to solicit support, whilst refusing to conduct any dialogue and negotiations among themselves to resolve national issues. We can blame the outsiders for interference but we must also accept our own part in facilitating the context for their intervention. (April 21, 2010).
Similar threads
