A Bangladeshinfo.com Analysis

A deliberate campaign by visible and invisible quarters is going on to paint Bangladesh as a fundamentalist country in the international arena in spite of its bright image as a moderate Muslim state with glorious past of having a harmonious society with a diverse casts and creeds enjoying equal rights and privileges.

Western diplomats in Dhaka never made any official remarks that could brand Bangladesh anyway as a country harbouring terrorist elements and fundamentalism. The country does neither export any ideology of religious revolution nor possess any warrior image for any evil causes, only except sending peacekeepers in peace missions under the UN umbrella. Bangladeshis working abroad earned reputation for their moderate religious posture along with honesty, sincerity and devotion to their works wherever they are or whatever may be their position.

Like many other Muslim countries, Bangladesh has been justifiably a member of Organisation of Islamic Conference (OIC), but that does not indicate any sign of having extremist views either by the government or by its people. Moreover, Dhaka has been coalition partner of America's war on terrorism and since the September 11 attack on US, the government has been in many ways keeping a strong vigil even on non-harmful religious groups as a pre-cautionary measure by monitoring their activities.

Then, how come this country would be treated as a potential threat and what hell she has committed that could bring notoriety for this peace-loving nation? Is it an undemocratic country ruled by the dictators or religious fanatics? Is there any communal riots that could have left hundreds of minorities killed? What else had a cynic seen inside this country, which could lead him/her to conclude it as "A Cocoon of Terror"?

The cover story by the Hone Kong-based Far Eastern Economic Review has no answer to questions like these, whereas one Bertil Lintner perhaps visiting Dhaka wrote what could only be compared with falsehood and a story framed in his creative imagination. Ruling out such propaganda, the government of the People's Republic of Bangladesh and its people were shell shocked for giving them a bad name by the Far Eastern Economic Review in its April 4 issue. A top official termed it a conspiracy to destroy Bangladesh's moderate image.

By captioning "Beware of Bangladesh", whom are being warned and the story's focus and language show its definite target and motive to turn somebody's face from this country of a lot of promises and prospects that the global community appreciated many times on different occasions.

The content of the story was sheer ridicule as it compared Bangladesh's political scenario with the situation in Pakistan. But he forgot the fact that Bangladesh came into being as a result of the dismemberment of Pakistan, fighting against autocratic governance in 1971. Religious harmony is so powerful in the country that even the Gujarat riots had no spillover effect at all in this peace-loving country, a positive mark that the author of the story could not see with his blindfolded eyes.

A Hindu revivalist party like BJP is in power in India with a moderate leader like Premier Atal Behari Vajpayee at the helm whereas a religious party like Jamat-e-Islami had a meagre share in the Parliament (only 17 out of 300 Members). In terms of vote banks, BJP had around 25 per cent votes while Jamaat obtained about 8 per cent votes with no rise in number since 1991 and before.

The writer did not take this calculation into considerations. Besides, the Mullahs (Islamic clerics) are a very insignificant factor in the country's mainstream politics and society as well. The Review's story mentioned only the superficial aspects of the Islamic religious forces, which are neither modern, nor capable of bringing any change in the society, let alone export of revolution.

No doubt, Bangladesh is a country of so many problems including the curse of poverty, not the thing called fundamentalism and its gradual rise that could easily shatter the state power structure. False and fabricated episodes could be written in reports only as unbecoming of a writer.

This author (of bangladeshinfo.com) did not want to respond to all domestic issues of politics as the Far Eastern Economic Review reporter did know nothing about the internal dynamics of Bangladesh politics and its social make-ups. Rather the question came: Why did he write such a shallow story and who paid him for that?