A positive change in the right direction is the highest need on the Indian subcontinent, especially for Bangladesh. The areas of society and politics are groaning for change in Bangladesh. Yet the nation has failed to see positive and lasting change in its social life and politics. The question is whether change is a choice or a challenge before the nation.

The nation of Bangladesh was born out of an armed conflict pitting West Pakistan against East Pakistan. Nine months after the war broke out, the Pakistan Army of West Pakistan surrendered at last on December 16, 1971, when the Mukti Bahini, a guerrilla force supporting East Pakistan, decisively defeated it. During the war, there were widespread killings and violations of human rights carried out by the Pakistan Army with support from political and religious militias of East Pakistan of that time. Three million people were killed, 200,000 women were tortured and raped, and the women who were raped gave birth to thousands of war babies.

Mahatma Gandhi said, “The true democrat is he who, with purely nonviolent means, defends his liberty and, therefore, his country’s and ultimately that of the whole of mankind.” It is very clear that the political regime of West Pakistan was not democratic and that the people and nations who supported them were equally liable for the brutal genocide committed against the innocent people of East Pakistan.

The nation of Bangladesh was obviously a result of a positive, dynamic change. Prominent writer Nathaniel Branden said, “The first step toward change is awareness. The second step is acceptance.” The nation of Bangladesh was created with a deep desire for secularism, but the nation has now been named as an ultra-Muslim country, as declared in the constitution itself. Almost four decades after the war for independence, all of the political parties and leaders of Bangladesh are failing to recall the principle of secularism put forth in the constitution of Bangladesh, with some politicians and political parties even fighting the removal of the declaration of Islam as the state religion from the constitution.

Once the people of Bangladesh took a strong position in ’71 to fight against sectarianism and challenged the world in the way it thought about Bangladesh. Yet now, the world still thinks of Bangladesh, not with sympathy or love, but with a fear of Islamic terrorism.

Bangladesh remains a threat to the world due to its expanding Islamic terrorism and will be one of the highest global threats in coming years. Political Islam is deeply ingrained in the way of life and politics of Bangladesh. There was a time when Bangladesh was under attack by foreigners, but now the nation is under attack from a power that controls the people and life of the nation, namely, Islam.

The minorities paid the most during the Bangladesh Liberation War, but the nation has failed to recognize their sacrifice. In almost all the ways possible, the minorities are persecuted by state-backed Islamic fascists, yet the nation has failed to secure their rights. The change is very visible. The minorities were persecuted during the Liberation War and are now being persecuted again for having a different religious faith. The war is run by Islamic fascists against secular forces.

Discrimination is highly visible if you look at the position of minorities in the state machinery. After almost four decades, not a single minority had the chance to be a prime minister or president of the nation, because of the sectarian forces out to destroy the minorities and secular forces. Recently, the government decided to change the name of the BDR for the mutiny, where more than 50 army officers were killed by the native paramilitary forces. The government said that the name of the BDR was hampered, so the name should be changed.

Bangladesh has failed greatly in various ways. The government should think about changing the name of Bangladesh. Benjamin Franklin said, “When you’re finished changing, you’re finished.” Yes, obviously if Bangladesh fails to change as a whole and move towards progressive political naturalism, the nation will face more than a BDR mutiny in the near future.

It’s time for the nation to think about whether a change for Bangladesh is a challenge or a choice before them. The nation of Bangladesh should remember the famous saying of Victor Hugo, that, “Liberation is not deliverance.”

Is the state of UP ready to accept the fact that there is a problem with Uttar Police Force? Or are they comfortable condoning the acts of brutality that are becoming a frequent occurrence now. The khaki brigade is running rampant and nothing seems to be done to reign them in either.

With another custodial death taking place in Hanspura Police station in Kanpur of a labourer Jung Bahadur Singh, the incident brings home the point of how uncontrolled the law enforcers are now in state of UP. Their tyrannical attitude is more than evident in cases like the one of a small time labourer who was thrashed to death for a crime as petty as some bricks being stolen by his two minor sons.

In a serious violation of human rights the incident comes close at heels of the UP Police implicating five innocent people for torching the house of UP congress Chief Rita Bhaguna.

While not a single accused the police claim to have arrested from the spot of the crime are in any way related to the crime, there seems to be no one ready to take action against the false arrests. Though the UP Congress Chief has been openly condemning the arrests, she has demanded a CBI inquiry into the issue.

As per Akhilesh Singh, Spokesperson UP Congress, “She has also filed a petition in the Highcourt against the unlawful arrests and from August 1 we will start a jail bharo andolan if our demand for a genuine high level CBI inquiry is not granted. We have personally visited the family of the arrested and have given them our word that innocent people will not be allowed to be made scapegoats in a government sponsored crime. The police is obviously involved in the arson as well which will come to light only when a CBI inquiry is conducted.”

A fact which is also corroborated by IG SR Darapuri, retd police officer and Vice President, Public Union For Civil Liberties an human rights organization that has constituted a 5 member team to investigate the five arrests made, “The investigating team has began preparing the report. Based on our findings and I can confidently say that the arrests made are false. Innocent people have been implicated and charged with arson which can get them life imprisonment if convicted. Though the CB CID has interrogated those accused, it very obvious that they are innocent. The police have picked these five just to show that they are prompt in their action as it’s the matter of a politician from the ruling party. Infact there were no spot arrests made three people Inder Kumar, Shiv Kumar and Guddu Yadav all relatives and residents of Neel Matha, Lucknow Cantt were booked at the Sadr Cantt police station. They were brought there after they had family brawl over water. They were kept sitting at a tempo stand in Sadr where a police jeep picked them up and send them to jail. The other two were in a motor accident and went to the Hussainganj police station on their own and ended up being arrested and charged with arson under Section 436 IPC. This is the way actual culprits were allowed to go scott free.”

Stressing further on the fact that the crime the five have been booked for is a heinous crime and face very serious implications for it despite the fact that they had not committed the offense. Darapuri adds, “PUCL in its report will demand that a CBI inquiry be conducted in the matter apart from demanding a judicial inquiry as well. We will also ask for strict action against those police personnel responsible for implicating innocent people falsely. Compensation from the state will also be asked for the victims and their family who are from a very improvised background. “

Also on the agenda of the PUCL report will be scrutinizing the role of agencies like the National and State Human Rights Commission who do not play stringent role in ensuring that such serious human rights violations do not go unpunished in the country.

Adds Vandana Mishra, who is also on the five member PUCL Team constituted to investigate the matter, “The report we present will definitely help the case of the five accused to prove their innocence in the court of law. While as per our inquiry conducted there it is very obvious innocent persons are being implicated PUCL’s effort will be to ensure that no injustice is done.”

But what has caused the UP Police to take on such an autocratic stance in the state?

As per Anjali Singh, Director Saaksham Foundation, and member PUCL who is also on the investigating team of PUCL, “The Uttar Pradesh Police goes by the motto ‘Protection of Good and Destruction of the bad.’ But with the UP Police Force now topping the list of human rights violations, their motto seems to have been reversed. And when it’s the largest police force in the world, we indeed need to sit up and take stock of where the Khaki Brigade is heading as a law enforcement agency and does it take its role seriously when it comes to protecting those who are innocent. As per a study by Human Rights Features, a publication that raises the Voice of the Asia Pacific Human Rights, it came to light that the Police abuse of authority is so prevalent in Uttar Pradesh as it has an inordinate amount of power and discretion delegated to them by the legal system, the political climate and society in general. The internal reward system, which provides monetary incentives or promotions for carrying out extrajudicial executions, also acts as a catalyst. Systemic and endemic corruption in the police and within the political and judicial agencies exacerbates the problem and ensures that such crimes go unpunished.”

In short it is the poverty stricken, the dalits and illiterate sections of society, generally become sitting ducks of such a system. The lack of access to the few difficult legal remedies that actually exist further emboldens the police force that is already out of control.

Feels IB Singh, Senior Advocate ,High Court, who has been addressing such issues, “No body is above the law, not even the police. The IPC(Indian Penal Code) has numerous sections that come into effect when the rights of a citizen is violated. Though there are no separate laws drawn up in case of violations by the police, the fact remains that the existing sections are applicable on the khaki brigade as well. Section 504 IPC, Section 506, Section 323 and Section 325 IPC which deals with assault, harassment, registering fraudulent cases, corruption and extortion all can be used to bring erring police personnel to book.”
But is the BSP led state government interested in doing?

With the way things are being done in UP, it does not seem so.

It is still a question in today’s Indonesian contemporary history whether the rise of then-Lieutenant General Soeharto to power in 1966 was a matter of “historical accident” where Soeharto was created by the stage of history, or whether he created the stage himself. But by the collapse of the regime in 1998 following nationwide protests by students and people which had catapulted the black spot on the New Order helm, increasing numbers of people tried to “straighten”² and “clarify” the history. Some of them indicated the involvement of Soeharto in the 1965 abortive coup which led to the end of the power of President Soekarno, the first president.

Soeharto got sweeping support from almost all parties including students and intellectuals, as well as armies that were under his command. The new regime then fixed the bankrupt country left by its predecessor, Old Order President Soekarno (Crouch 1984:75; Robison 1997:32-3), by assuring people that the economy should be the priority in his new administration. In a relatively short time Soeharto’s New Order regime was able to stabilize the economy (Mackie 1993:76), making his potential adversaries unable to topple him. This economic success was the prime justification and legitimacy for the regime until its collapse in 1998.

It seems the dictum “l’histoire se repete”³ applied when the regime’s collapse was also caused by the economic crisis following the country’s currency collapse. The economic crisis caused sweeping hardships, especially in the countryside where people’s purchasing power fell nearly to zero.

This paper will discuss the rise and fall of Soeharto’s New Order regime, 1966-1998, which was caused by economic factors. By hypothesizing that the economy was the dominant cause of the regime’s rise as well as its fall, this paper will examine evidence that supports the argument. Sources in the form of books and media reports are in Bahasa Indonesia and English. The following sections will begin with the rise of Soeharto to power.

Genesis of the New Order Regime: When Economic Growth and Development Become Ideology

Probably the most important question concerning the rise of the New Order to power, is, if there were no bloody Communist coup on September 30, 1965, would the regime exist? Both foreign and Indonesian historians put the problem of the coup attempt as a crucial element in assessing the existence of the New Order in Indonesian modern history. It appears that the coup that threw the country into chaos was a justification for the then-Lieutenant General Soeharto to “save” the country. Saving the country was a sublime deed, and this was the oath and commitment of the armed forces.

According to history written by the New Order regime, on the night of September 30, 1965, seven army generals were killed by the Indonesian Communist Party or PKI (Partai Komunis Indonesia). The intent was to paralyze the capital city of Jakarta in an attempt to rule the country. This New Order version of history was taught in schools and touted through books, the press and films; campaign mounted to brainwash people so they would accept the regime’s legitimacy. Any dissidents who tried to question or reinterpret the history were regarded as “subversive” or “Communist.” But recently, mainly after the fall of the regime, this version of the country’s history has been  questioned.

The coup attempt interpretation is still contested (this account can also be found in the work of McDonald 1980:43). Soeharto’s New Order made the PKI the scapegoat which led to the massacre of around 500,000 people identified as members of the Communist Party and affiliated with it. The rumor of the so-called Dewan Jenderal (Council of Generals) who conspired to commit the coup was part of Soeharto’s campaign to discredit the PKI. This theory says that the Dewan Jenderal conspired to rule the country by, first, killing the seven prominent generals. If this theory is true, then Dewan Jenderal is an indication of an internal problem within the army. However, this account is doubted by several researchers.

A contradictory opinion says that assessing the bloody coup attempt while ignoring the role of Soeharto is almost impossible. In an interview in Arnold Brackman’s The Communist Collapse in Indonesia, Soeharto claimed that on the night of September 30, he was treating his three-year-old son who fell sick. Soeharto said,

Two days before September 30, our three-year-old son had an accident at home. He poured hot soup on himself and we had to rush him to the hospital. Many friends visited my son there and on the night of September 30 I was there, too (May 1978:117).

W.F. Wertheim, a noted expert on Indonesia, doubted Soeharto’s claim, arguing that a military officer who was as important as Soeharto knew nothing about the coup. Lieutenant General Soeharto was the commander of the Indonesian elite force Kostrad, or the Army Reserve Strategic Command. Wertheim says,

How curious, that a man, who was one of the main plotters in the coup, and whose attention should have been fully occupied by the preparations for what was to happen that night, found time to go out of his way to enquire after the health of a little child! Suharto’s⁴ explanation that Latief probably wanted to know whether he, Suharto, the famous fighting general who had led, on the first of March, 1949, the raid on Jogja, then in Dutch hands, was so much preoccupied with the illness of his child that he could be counted upon not to interfere is too ludicrous to be taken seriously.

What matters is that the plotters, far from finding Suharto unimportant, on the contrary deemed him so important that they wanted to make sure where he stood, just before their action would start (May 1978:117-8).

A softer tone of suspicion against Soeharto’s involvement in the Communist coup attempt may be found in Schwarz’s work (2000). According to a polite Javanese-style conversation between President Soekarno and Soeharto, Soeharto himself seized power from Soekarno after the President failed to return conditions to normalcy. Amidst chaotic conditions with students flocking to the streets for demonstrations, Soeharto met President Soekarno.

… A dispirited Sukarno, President for Life, Supreme Commander, Mouthpiece of the Indonesian People, and Great Leader of the Revolution, asked plaintively: “Soeharto, what are you going to do with me? I am your leader.”

“I have always respected you as I have my parents,” Soeharto replied. “To me you are not only our national leader, but I consider you as a parent. I’d like to regard you highly but, unfortunately, you do not wish this.” It was, though clouded with typical Javanese indirection, a readily understood message that Sukarno’s days were numbered. “I was sure,” Soeharto said in a later recounting of the story, “that Sukarno knew what I meant.”

He was right. Sukarno, finally beginning to decipher the writing on the wall, asked one more time, just to be sure: “Is this true, Soeharto?”

“Yes, it’s true,” Soeharto replied (Schwarz 2000:2).

An account of the coup is contained in the so-called Cornell Paper. This interpretation held by several Indonesianists from Cornell University argued that the coup attempt was an “internal affair of the army” (Mody 1987:15). Quoting the paper, Mody said,

The coup of 1 October 1965⁵ was neither the work of PKI nor Soekarno himself… though both were deeply involved. They were more victims than the initiators of events (Ibid 1987:15).

The debate over the rise of Soeharto’s New Order — whether it was legally accepted because of the nation’s chaotic condition or because of the “hidden coup” –  became obsolete when the regime was able to fix the country’s economy. Starvation, the most frightening disaster in the third world, failed to materialize as the logical consequence of the “successful” economic development. Accompanied by the oil boom of 1973-4, the “efficient” use of foreign loans had jacked the economic growth up to seven percent (Mackie 1993:76).

The new government was busy arranging plans for development not long after it came to power. As Soeharto’s New Order was a military regime with no expertise in economics and development — it is even said that it was doubtful whether Soeharto knew what IMF was (Bresnan 1993:74)⁶ – he asked for help from several economists at the University of Indonesia. With the involvement of the academics in the development process, this period marked the  rise of what was known as “technocrats,” an elite group of scholars who had expertise in economics. This group was later known as the Berkeley Mafia – referring to their alma mater in Berkeley, University of California’s School of Economics. They included Soemitro Djojohadikoesoemo, Muhammad Sadli, Emil Salim, Subroto and Widjojo Nitisastro, all of whom were professors at the University of Indonesia’s School of Economics. The “Washington factor” was suspected of playing a role behind this economic team.

This inspired the American New Leftist, David Ransom, writing in Ramparts, to brand the team as the Berkeley Mafia and to link them with a Washington conspiracy to infiltrate Indonesia both economically and politically. There is no doubt that Washington was delighted at the appointment of the team and did all in its power to ensure that the Indonesian economy was run in a way that it approved; but no evidence has been produced to justify the pejorative term, Mafia, which unfortunately has found its way into at least one learned work (May 1978:338).

This “Washington conspiracy” is widely believed, given that a strong economic advisory team was sent by the U.S. government, including the Harvard Development Advisory Service.

The first step of Soeharto’s new administration was to lower inflation in a bid to stabilize prices. Skyrocketing prices had instigated students demonstrations in Jakarta that also contributed significantly to the fall of President Soekarno. The inflation rate doubled from 1961 to 1964, increased sevenfold in 1965, and continued at the same rate in the early part of 1966 (Bresnan 1993:56). As Bresnan puts it,

One of the causes of the inflation was the persistent and growing deficit in the government budget. The deficit was related, in part, to impact of important political events. The deficit jumped in 1958, reflecting the “outer island” rebellion; again in 1961, reflecting the West Irian campaign⁷; and again in 1964, reflecting “confrontation.”⁸ On each of these occasions, the increase in the deficit was greater than it had been the time before (Bresnan 1993:56).

Only at the end of 1998 did the government succeed in controlling inflation, and over the subsequent three years it has never been greater than 10 percent (Bresnan 1993:71).

The country’s foreign debt as of December 31, 1965, during President Soekarno’s tenure, totaled $2.3 billion (Bresnan 1993:67). Poor economic performance accompanied by spiraling internal political affairs tainted Soekarno’s image in the eyes of the people at large. At that time Soekarno ignored economic development. Instead, he pushed for his leadership recognition among Third World countries. For Soekarno, politics was everything (politik sebagai panglima). In some cases, though it seemed that he developed the economy, that was not the final goal, as any measures he made were aimed at building his political image among the Third World countries. Thus, several lighthouse projects were set up although they had no direct effect for improving people’s economic condition. One of these projects was the Bandung Asia Africa Conference in 1955 which would later become the embryo of Non-Aligned Movement and South-South cooperation.

Soeharto’s technocrats totally reformed the country’s economy to a laissez-faire economy. Formerly closely linked with the socialist system since President Soekarno  was a Communist sympathizer and allowed the Communist Party to exist in Indonesia, it now became a capitalist system. From being a state-controlled economy, it now became a market-driven economy. This economic decontrolling materialized in a number of policies contained in the October 3, 1966 decrees.

The state eliminated the existing system of multiple exchange rates and import-export licensing controls from a large portion of the country’s international trade. The central bank announced it would sell foreign exchange at a rate to be fixed from week to week. On the same day, import licensing restrictions were greatly liberalized. In practice, importers were free to import what they wished, with the exception of certain key commodities. At the same time export procedures were simplified, and most central and regional government authorities were expressly precluded from interfering in the export trade. The effect of these actions was to remove numerous distortions from the domestic price structure and to eliminate a major source of bureaucratic and political corruption (Bresnan 1993:64-5).

This economic reform brought about significant results for several countries as well as international financial institutions supported the step. These economic policies were first outlined at a conference of representatives of the Indonesian government in Tokyo on September 19, 1966. Seven creditor countries were represented – the United States, Japan, Britain, France, West Germany, Italy, and the Netherlands. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) and Australia also were represented, while Canada, New Zealand and Switzerland sent observers. Ironically, the largest single creditor, the Soviet Union, was not invited (Bresnan 1993:63).

Part of the statement presented before the creditor countries read,

For some months now a reshaping of our political structure has taken place. A new order has emerged with a pragmatic rather than doctrinaire approach in solving our nation’s problems.

Specifically, the (Consultative  Assembly) ordered the Indonesian Government to formulate and to carry out an economic stabilization programme to be preceded by an immediate rescue programme. In this respect the control of inflation receives first priority, while the rehabilitation programme is primarily concerned with the following sectors: food, infrastructure, exports and clothing.

The creation of the right social and monetary condition being uppermost in our mind, the Government has planned to introduce to this end measures which in broad outline are as follows:

• 1. by rendering a more proper role to market forces, create a wider and equal opportunity for participation in the development of our economy by all creative efforts, state and private, domestic and foreign  alike;
  2. the achievement of a balanced State Budget;
  3. pursuance of a rigid yet well-directed credit policy of the banking system;
  4. establishment of a proper link between domestic and the international economy through a realistic exchange rate, and thus creating stimuli to reverse the downward trend of the balance of payments (Financial Times, September 22, 1966, cited by Bresnan 1993:63-64 from Arndt and Panglaykim’s “Survey of Recent Developments,” Bulletin of Indonesian Economic Studies no. 4, June 1966:3-4).

These new economic policies brought about economic conditions that  increased the number of people doing business, mainly the ethnic Chinese. This period was the embryo of the so-called konglomerasi, an Indonesian term referring to the growing number of conglomerates, which would materialize as monsterous leviathans⁹ in the late 1980s and 1990s. Thus, a small number of nouveaux riches existed. These were intentionally created by the government in accordance with its “trickle down effect” theory.¹⁰

To sustain development, the New Order created what is known as the Five Year Development Plan or Pelita (Pembangunan Lima Tahun) in 1969. Different emphases were given to different Pelita in accordance with the development needs during that time period. For example, early Pelita gave emphasis to agricultural development while the latter Pelita shifted to industrialization with export orientation. With the Pelita the government started new and rational state budget management that began in April and ended in March the following year. The Ministry of Finance and the Agency for National Development Planning or Bappenas (Badan Perencanaan Pembangunan Nasional) acted as “the guardian of public treasury,” while other departments acted as “the spending advocates” (Mas’oed 1989:186). The budgeting process can be elaborated as follows:

1. The process is begun with the preparation of a “project proposal list” (DUP, Daftar Usulan Proyek) by every unit in the governmental body during July and August every year. The DUP is then sent to the guardian for further review;
2. During September-October, the guardian gives assessment to various DUPs and conducts meetings with officials from the concerned departments;
3. After knowing the planned development investment, the government begins its diplomacy to obtain foreign aid, with Inter-Governmental Group on Indonesia (IGGI) as the major donor institution;
4. In early January every year the President proposes the State Budget (RAPBN) in the form of a bill to the House which is usually accepted without significant change. After approval by the House, the President signs the bill, and it thus becomes State Budget Law. The next phase is the budget spending;
5. The development budget spending begins with the submission of a “project filling list” (DIP, Daftar Isian Proyek) by departments and governmental agencies to the Minister of Finance and Bappenas Chairman based on the DUP received previously;
6. The departments through a tender procedure choose contractors to execute the projects. The contractors could be state-owned  or private companies (Mas’oed 1989:186-7).

The IGGI gave aid to Indonesia in two forms, projects and programs. As its name implies, the project covers a wide range of development projects, while the program consists of credits for food and other selected commodities. In the beginning, as there were only a few projects, program aid dominated: in 1969-70 the commitment for the program was $320 million, with $180 million for projects. But in 1972-73 the commitment for program aid was $320 while projects amounted to $350 million (May 1978:342).

The New Order’s rise to power, as well as its endurance, was supported by at least two elements, internal and external factors. The internal factors include sweeping supports from students, intellectuals and armies. The external factors are foreign political and financial supports. Political support was also provided by the United States government fearing that the Communists would take over the power as President Soekarno allowed the PKI to grow. Financial support came from international financial institutions including the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank (WB).

With its success in stabilizing the country in both economy and security, the new regime depoliticized people (Mackie 1993:77) in order to maintain stability. The government rhetoric claimed politics was something “evil” which could not bring prosperity. This was a contrast to the previous government which had made politics a priority while at the same time ignoring economic development. Depoliticization took place in the form of repression and threats by the state. Participation in politics made one always suspect as a “dissenter,” while daring to criticize the government meant “subversive” or “PKI,” the terms which directly victimized the Old Order government. At the village level people were barred from actively participating in politics, which was known as the “floating mass” (massa mengambang). The “floating mass” practice included the isolation of people in the villages from party politics except just prior to the five year General Election.

The regime’s success in maintaining stability was possible because of the repressive military support. Bureaucracy was militarized with most positions filled by military officers, from the presidential post to the village level lurah or kepala desa.¹¹ This militarization turned the country into one of the worst abusers of human rights. There was no freedom of speech. A critical press was regarded as a potential threat to the state which could ruin the stability. Some brave enough to criticize the government were banned and barred from operating. Political, human rights and environmental activists who held protests were arrested and thrown into jail. Stories about killings and torture by the military were rampant and regarded as normal in the name of “stability” and “economic growth.”

The oil bonanza of 1971-74 put the national economy at the peak of its growth. However, prior to this lucky period, export commodities in several non-oil and gas sectors had increased which also fueled the engine of growth. OPEC increased the oil price from around  US$3 to US$12 per barrel in 1973-4; and later to over US$33 in 1979-80 (Mackie 1993:85).

The paradox in this period is, while on one hand economic growth had brought about prosperity to the people, but on the other hand the state had become more and more repressive to maintain security and stability. The New Order regime argued that without stability the country would not be able to overcome economic backwardness. Development slogans filled all types of media. The state became the “stabilizer” in a bid to pursue a “just and welfare state.” Almost every day radio and television stations, as well as newspapers, carried such messages. People were required to accept this “episteme” created by the ruler. Otherwise, they could be sent to jail.

According to several intellectuals, up to this point, the state not only controlled how the people should behave to maintain such an economic performance through stability, but also how they should “think” and “understand” reality. Through the media the state created discourses it expected to be mainstream. Through the development jargon people were forced to swallow messages with which they sometimes — even frequently –  disagreed. To use historian Taufik Abdullah’s terminology, the state had applied a “hegemony of meaning” over the people through jargon (in Latief and Ibrahim, ed. 1996). This “hegemony of meaning” was the way the government controlled consciousness of the people who in turn could not but accept any programs promoted.

The Decay and the Fall of the Regime

Samuel P. Huntington’s thesis (1968) may best describe the fall of Soeharto from power in 1998 following massive nationwide protests which destabilized the country. Soeharto’s success with economic development resulted in a middle class and a few nouveaux riches. Nationwide, quality of life improved, and the literacy rate grew, accompanied by greater demands for political participation and openness. Along with this economic success, in the early 1990s President Soeharto began to change his leadership strategy by opening wider space for freedom of speech. This keterbukaan (openness) may be compared with Gorbachev’s glasnost in the former Soviet Union. This new policy was hailed enthusiastically by the people at large. Control over the press was eased, critical artists – though still required to have licenses to perform — were no longer tightly controlled. Intellectuals in a few seminars and forums with limited audiences dared to criticize several government policies, mainly those related to the wide gap between the rich and the poor.

This openness did not last long. The government again applied tight control over freedom of speech. In 1994 the Ministry of Information banned the licenses of three leading critical publications, namely Tempo (Time) and Editor magazines, as well as Detik (Second) tabloid.¹² These publications were well-known for their investigative reporting. Tempo, prior to the ban, reported the purchase of several secondhand warships from Germany, a deal which was allegedly full of corrupt practices involving a number of high-ranking officials. The new openness seemed to have threatened the government with critical views. Tight control had again showed that obviously the country’s economic growth was not followed by adequate political participation for the people.

This gap, according to Huntington, could create destabilization. He argues that “economic development itself is a highly destabilizing process and that the very changes which are needed to satisfy aspirations in fact tend to exacerbate those aspirations” (Huntington 1968:49). Thus, rapid economic development,

• 1. disrupts traditional social groupings (family, class, caste), and thus increases “the number of individuals who are déclassé … and who are thus in circumstances conducive to revolutionary protest;¹³
  2. produces nouveaux riches who are imperfectly adjusted to and assimilated by the existing order and who want political power and social status commensurate with their new economic position;
  3. increases geographical mobility which again undermines social ties, and, in particular, encourages rapid migration from rural areas to cities, which produces alienation and political extremism;
  4. increases the number of people whose standard of living is falling, and thus may widen the gap between rich and poor;
  5. increases the incomes of some people absolutely but not relatively and hence increases their dissatisfaction with the existing order;
  6. requires a general restriction of consumption in order to promote investment and thus produces popular discontent;
  7. increases literacy, education, and exposure to mass media, which increase aspirations beyond levels where they can be satisfied;
  8. aggravates regional and ethnic conflicts over the distribution of investment and consumption;
  9. increases capacities for group organization and consequently the strength of group demands on government, which the government is unable to satisfy (Huntington 1968:49-50).

Almost all of these nine conditions occurred in the country prior to the regime’s collapse in 1998. This economic growth can be likened to a hydraulic pump that added energy to social unrests. There were sweeping criticisms and complaints about the fact that there were only a few channels for political aspirations.

The top-down management could be found anywhere in the country. The so-called “patrimonial” and “paternalistic” practice of governance was rampant. It was almost impossible to find a pure idea that arose from the bottom and was then adopted by the top management. This type of governance was a reflection of Soeharto’s authoritarian and militaristic regime that assumed that security and tight control over the people would sustain economic growth.

The 1997 General Election was again won by the ruling party Golkar (Golongan Karya or Functional Group). In the March 1998 MPR (People’s Consulative Assembly) General Session, the highest body, Soeharto was again elected as the President, for the sixth consecutive time. But since April protests spearheaded by students demanding that Soeharto step down had prevailed nationwide. The military repressed the protests which frequently ended with bloody violence. The killing of three Trisakti University students accelerated the fall of Soeharto from power. The protests formerly only done by students now involved people on the street. Jakarta turned violent with the persecution of the more prosperous ethnic Chinese. Indigenous people attacked ethnic Chinese believing that the economic pie had only been enjoyed by these few minorities. Some believed that this ethnic Chinese persecution had nothing to do with racial hatred, but was merely related to the economic jealousy.¹⁴ Pressures for Soeharto to step down grew with the increasing scale of violence. Since May 19 the students had occupied the MPR building. Soeharto offered to reshuffle his cabinet to save his power, but the resignation of 14 key ministers ended his dream. On the morning of May 21 Soeharto announced his resignation, broadcast nationwide by TV and radio stations.

Huntington’s thesis argues that rapid economic growth might potentially destabilize a country. In the case of Indonesia, however, it can be said that the Asian economic crisis was the most significant factor that led to the decay of the regime with its inability to solve it. The crisis was preceded by the rupiah currency decreasing in value against the US dollar. In June 1997, the rupiah was still around Rp2,200 per US dollar, but the next month currency was unable to stand against the “domino effect” of the regional currency crisis generated by Thailand’s baht’s tumbling down. The rupiah’s value decreased slowly to levels of Rp2,300, Rp2,500, Rp3,000, and Rp5,000. In a few months the currency’s value again tumbled to Rp7,000. The worst condition the currency had ever experienced was when it reached the level of Rp17,000.

This currency devaluation brought about skyrocketing prices which hit people’s low purchasing power. When the currency crisis could not be handled, it impacted the economy which in turn caused an economic crisis. This economic crisis created massive bankruptcy among companies which had to import their raw materials. The decreasing value of the rupiah meant that they needed more rupiah to purchase the materials whose prices were in dollars. With bankruptcy, massive layoffs occurred everywhere which hit to social stability. A widespread unemployment was thus unavoidable.

The economic crisis created a nationwide panic since all goods prices could no longer be afforded by the people at large. The crime rate increased, number of unemployed jumped. The country that formerly had claimed success in reducing the number of people living below the poverty line no longer could be proud of the achievement, as the number of poor people again swelled.

The development that the New Order was always proud of was suddenly extinct. Previously the IMF and the World Bank praised Indonesia for its success, moreover it was always able to pay its loans on time. But the crisis dissolved the pride, and all of the development successes became a mirage. In this condition a wave of unhappy feeling that could not be barred by the autocratic regime grew. In March nobody would dare to predict what would happen in May. Soeharto’s days were numbered. And May 21, 1998 became Doomsday for his power that led the country to a transition toward democracy.

Concluding Remarks

Different from what happened (or is happening) in Africa where “the problem is not so much that development has failed as that it was never really on the agenda in the first place” (Ake 1996:1), in Indonesia, development had been on the agenda of the ruling regime as well as the technocrats that accompanied it. The Indonesian development problem lies in the absence of good governance with corruption prevalent, lack of accountability, and poor transparency. The creation of the Pelita or Five Year Development Plan was the most important program in terms of development. This Pelita had improved the people’s quality of life, income per capita, and other economic indicators. The economic growth could be maintained at the level of seven to eight percent per year. But since the state practiced what is known as “crony capitalism,” only a handful of people really enjoyed the development’s pie. Thus, we can say that the problem was poor economic equality at the expense of high economic growth. Since the early 1990s a few intellectuals¹⁵ have criticized this economic gap arguing that it was a time bomb that could explode anytime because of social jealousy. This warning materialized in the May riots that led to Soeharto’s fall.

This “crony capitalism” was possible because of the absence of good governance. Businessmen ruled, while the bureaucrats became their servants who could be bribed. This problem, according to several proponents of neo liberalism, made the economy and development inefficient which in turn affected the economic fundamentals. That is why when the monetary crisis hit the country in 1997, Indonesia did not bounce back as quickly as did Singapore and Malaysia. Rather, it turned into a prolonged economic crisis which still exists today.

Doubtless U.S. government aid to Indonesia as well as that of other donor institutions is part of their interest to promote democracy (Carothers 1999). However, in this post-Soeharto regime Indonesia’s transition toward democracy is costly. Some believed that the violence which sparked across the archipelago is a sign of potential disintegration, mainly after the independence of East Timor. Skeptics see that Indonesia, with its  more than 13,000 islands – the largest archipelagic nation in the world, and its 220 million people, will no longer exist if this transition fails to run smoothly. Stability no longer exists. Euphoria towards democracy generated chaotic conditions which promise nothing for economic recovery. Thus, few spoke of development in this post-Soeharto era as it is not a “sexy” topic. All energy is spent enjoying democracy and the political turmoil it brings about.

Although the country has a new designation as the third largest democracy in the world, after India and the U.S., it will still take a long time to make it a culture which can educate its people and lift them from their backwardness. Today the House has become the government’s control, a role that was impossible in the Soeharto era. However this “checks and balances” role of the House has sometimes created turmoil as it brought about conflict with the President. Recently President Abdurrahman Wahid, the first democratically elected President, was given a memorandum by the House for two alleged corruption practices. This memorandum potentially could lead to a Special Session that could oust the President. The conflict between the House and President who victimized economic recovery program was thus sharpened. The IMF has suspended its aid several times. The government’s credibility is now at stake.

References Cited

Ake, Claude

• 1. Democracy and Development in Africa. Wahington, D.C.: The Brookings Institution.

Bresnan, John

1993 Managing Indonesia. New York: Columbia University Press.

Carothers, Thomas

• 1. Aiding Democracy Abroad. Washington, D.C.: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

Crouch, Harold

• 1. Domestic Political Structures and Regional Economic Co-operation. Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies.

Huntington, Samuel P.

1968 Political Order in Changing Societies. New York: Yale University.

Mackie, Jamie

• 1. Indonesia: Economic Growth and Depoliticization, in James W. Morley, ed. “Driven by Growth: Political Change in the Asia-Pacific Region.” New York: M.E. Sharpe.

Mas’oed, Mohtar

• 1. Ekonomi dan Struktur Politik: Orde Baru 1966-1971. Jakarta: LP3ES.

May, Brian

1978 The Indonesian Tragedy. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

McDonald, Hamish

1980 Suharto’s Indonesia. Honolulu: The University Press of Hawaii.

Mody, Nawaz B.

1987 Indonesia under Suharto. New York: APT Books Inc.

Robison, Richard

• 1. Politics and Markets in Indonesia’s Post-oil Era in Gerry Rodan et al., ed., “The Political Economy of South-East Asia.” Oxford University Press: Melbourne.

Schwarz, Adam

2000 A Nation in Waiting. Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press.

Tempo (Time) Magazine, January 29, 2001

There are also major athletic races around the world. Recently, during a sleepless night, I turned on my television to one of the sports channels to watch the Tour de France. A few hundred men were bicycling all across France in hopes of earning the daily privilege of wearing the yellow jersey that indicates that they are in the lead. They are all fighting for the same prize, a cash award set aside for each year’s winner.

For those of us who call ourselves Christ followers, when we consider our purpose in this world, it would serve us well to think in terms of a race. Paul himself used this analogy in some of his writings. We can find one such analogy in Paul’s first letter to the Church in Corinth. In chapter 9 of this letter, in verses 24 through 27, we find Paul’s description as follows in the New Living Translation:

Don’t you realize that in a race, everyone runs, but only one person gets the prize? So run to win! All athletes are disciplined in their training. They do it to win a prize that will fade away, but we do it for an eternal prize. So, I run with purpose in every step. I am not just shadowboxing. I discipline my body like an athlete, training it to do what it should. Otherwise, I fear that after preaching to others I myself might be disqualified.

Paul understood the importance and urgency of the task to evangelize the world. Paraphrasing from his letter to the Church in Ephesus: The race we are in is a race to fearlessly proclaim the gospel to everyone, everywhere, every time we can (Eph 6:19).

Our race is not one that generates a large cash payout or the privilege to wear a yellow jersey. Money and jerseys are someday going to return to dust and to ash. They are going to fade away. As Paul noted, our race is one that generates eternal rewards; however, our race is not one for the lazy. Like the physical conditioning an athlete must endure, in order to fearlessly proclaim the gospel effectively, we likewise must condition ourselves.

Yes, our conditioning requires that we be physically able to proclaim the gospel, but it carries an even greater requirement. The race we are in requires us to be in top spiritual condition. Just as the athlete will be up early each day and running his neighborhood, bicycling his city, or swimming for hours, a ready contestant in the eternal race must get up early, running through the scriptures, cycling his way through prayer, and swimming with the Holy Spirit into a fresh anointing for the task of the day.

The writer to the Jewish believers in the book of Hebrews captures the requirements for this race very well. I love the way The Message Bible, an English paraphrase of the scripture, presents this story from Hebrews 12:1–3:

Do you see what this means — all these pioneers who blazed the way, all these veterans cheering us on? It means we’d better get on with it. Strip down, start running — and never quit! No extra spiritual fat, no parasitic sins.

Keep your eyes on Jesus, who both began and finished this race we’re in. Study how he did it. Because he never lost sight of where he was headed — that exhilarating finish in and with God — he could put up with anything along the way: Cross, shame, whatever. And now he’s there, in the place of honor, right alongside God.

When you find yourselves flagging in your faith, go over that story again, item by item, that long litany of hostility he plowed through. That will shoot adrenaline into your souls!

Did you catch that? “Strip down, start running — and never quit! No extra spiritual fat, no parasitic sins.”

“Strip down.” We have to stop filling our days full of junk that prevents us from having the time or energy to get into the race – turn off the television, close down the computer, put a way that novel, unload all of that stuff and start running.

“No extra spiritual fat.” In other words, stop talking about all the great things you are going to do for the Lord and actually get in there and do it. You’ve heard the expression, “He is so spiritually minded that he is of no earthly good.” Some people want to wait in the Word and wait in prayer until the Lord comes and personally takes them by the hand and kicks them in the seat and says start running. That is extra spiritual fat and we need to get rid if it.

We do need to condition ourselves, but then we need to simply “start running.” George Jenkins, the founder of one of the largest super markets in the USA was often quoted as saying “Begin, the rest is easy.” The writer of Hebrews is essentially saying the same thing, “start running – and never quit!” What good does it do us to start the race, then as soon as it gets difficult, to quit?

Think about those men riding in the Tour de France this year. It’s the last day of their competitive stages. They have been pushing their bodies harder than ever day after day through each stage of the race. Then, at the time when they are beaten down to their greatest point of weakness, they are required to top one of the highest and most difficult ascents of the race. Do they quit? No! Each rider presses on. Even if they know they will not be among the top three who get the major prizes, they still press on. That’s what the writer is saying to us, we need to “start running – and never quit!”

Finally, “No parasitic sins.” Sin is a killer. It is the one tool that Satan has over us that can totally disqualify us in this race. In the television show, when teams violate the rules, they have to sit on the sidelines and watch as the other teams come to the finish line for that day’s task. In many road races, a violation means that time is tacked on to your finishing time, essentially moving you further back from the prize. Sin is a violation in our race to proclaim the gospel. It can be as severe as doping is to an athletic race. When we try to run the race and still engage in sin that breaks God’s heart, He removes His protection and the enemy of our task is able to inflict penalty after penalty. In the end, even with the best spiritual conditioning, sin will cause us to fall behind in the race. And, like the athlete caught doping to get an advantage in his physical race, sin can totally disqualify us from participating in this spiritual race.

Are you a Christ Follower? If so, then you are called to be in this race. We see in Acts chapter 1 as well as in Matthew chapter 28, that all those who follow Him are called to be His witness, to go and make disciples. Christ Himself set the example as shown in John 9:4 where He said, “As long as it is day, we must do the work of him who sent me.” Why the urgency? He even provided that answer, because “Night is coming, when no one can work.”

Billions of people around the world still have not been told about Jesus. The time for proclaiming the gospel is very short. It’s our task to condition ourselves quickly and to get into the race. A race to fearlessly proclaim the gospel to a world that does not know Jesus. A race we run not for some cash reward or earthly prize, but for an eternal prize whose value is greater than anything we could get in this world.

The race is ours to win or lose. Are you in the race?

Wayne Brown is an Assemblies of God pastor and missionary, currently residing in the USA. His ministry is called The Vital Message. For more information, visit the ministry website at http://TheVitalMessage.org.

Tipaimukh – Bangladesher Jonno Kothin Porikkha

President Obama, visiting a slave-fort in Ghana, condemned slavery, pointing to a chruch that stood next to the slave-dungeons, to obviate the popular paradigm as to how European Christians, with sanctions from the church, engaged in black slavery, probably the only slavery that existed in history and is worth condemning. But Islam—whose role in slavery is much bigger, crueler, and more tragic—remains thoroughly untouched; as if Islam and its followers were/are untouched by the vice of slavery.

It’s a popular wisdom that the only slavery existed in history is the black slavery, whereby European traders captured and transported black Africans to the New World (Americas, West Indies).

Ask a Muslim; he/she will tell you so. An America-born young Muslim wrote to me: “Do you know how the American slave-hunters went to Africa, seized the black people and brought them to America as slaves? America’s economic power owes a great deal to the labor of those slaves.”

Nation of Islam’s Louis Farrakhan terms the trans-Atlantic slave-trade “worst and most cruel slavery” in history, adding that some white Americans do not know that “they are in the privileged position… based on what happened to us (Blacks)” in the past.

An overwhelming majority of Muslims believe that Islamic history is devoid of the abhorrent practice of slavery. Rocky Davis (aka Shahid Malik), an Australian Aboriginal convert to Islam, told the ABC Radio that “Christianity were the founders of slavery. Not Islam.”

Indeed, from my own experience of living as a Muslim for 35 years, this is one of the major reasons of why anti-West hatred is so strong amongst Muslims.

When Muslims in India talk about the practice of slavery in the subcontinent, they talk about the harrowing tales of how the Portuguese transported slaves from coastal areas of Goa, Kerala and Bengal in terrible conditions, and nothing else.

However, when I investigated, I was shocked to discover that Muslims—armed with divine and prophetic sanctions—practised slavery of a much greater proportion and tragedy, which I have discussed in my recent book, Islamic Jihad: A Legacy of Forced Conversion Imperialism and Slavery.

It is fortunate that President Obama, visiting a former slave-trading fort in Ghana on July 11, condemn this dark chapter in human history rightly as a “great evil”, adding “As African-Americans, there is a special sense that… this place was a place of profound sadness…”

Obama also pointed to a church, standing next to slave-dungeons, to obviate the paradigm as to how European Christians, with sanctions from the church, engaged in black slavery.

This popular paradigm excludes three major facts about slavery:

1. Black slavery was not the only slavery in history. The Arabs, Turks, Indians and even millions of Europeans were also reduced to slavery during the same period and before, with added dimensions of sex-slavery and castration. And the perpetrators were Muslims, not Europeans.
2. Black slaves were not shipped to the New World alone; a greater number were sent to the Islamic world.
3. Even in trans-Atlantic slave-trade, Muslims were complicit and played the cruelest role.

Islamic history informs us that Prophet Muhammad himself, armed with affirmed and reaffirmed divine sanctions (Quran 16:76, 30:28, 16:71, 70:29–30, 23:5–6, 33:50 etc.), initiated Islamic slavery by enslaving the women and children of a number of Arabian tribes (Quraiza, Khaybar, Mustaliq and Hawazin etc.). Later, as Islamic power grew in leaps and bounds, slavery witnessed a tremendous burst on the world stage. Everywhere Muslims won victory, the women and children of the vanquished were enslaved in massive numbers: General Musa enslaved 300,000 in his conquest of North Africa in 698 and returned from his conquest of Spain in 715 with the Caliph’s one-fifth share of the booty that included 30,000 white virgins from the Visigothic nobility alone, while Sultan Mahmud returned from his invasion of India in 1001–02 CE with 500,000 enslaved women and children. This is only a tip of the iceberg.

No small victims of Islamic slavery were Europeans themselves, who started falling victims to Islamic assaults in the Mediterranean islands within two decades after Muhammad’s death. And it continued well into the 19th century: the Ottomans, even in their decisive defeat and retreat from the Gates of Vienna in 1683, returned with 80,000 white captives, while Barbary pirates enslaved up to 1.5 million Europeans between the 1530s and 1820s, from European merchant-ships off the North African coast, plus from slave-raiding expeditions to costal villages and islands of Europe.

Even American merchant-ships and their crew suffered horrible Barbary depredations and enslavements. Prior to independence, Britain negotiated the release of captured American ship-crews whenever possible paying heavy ransom. After 1776, America signed treaties with Barbary States for securing safety of her ships by paying hefty tribute. To placate Muslims in Cairo speech, President Obama flaunted this humiliating treaty on America’s part as a respectful past relationship between Islam and America. As demand for higher ransom and depredations of U.S. ships continued, America had to engage in a difficult war to stop horrible enslavement of Americans in North Africa. Putting an end to continued enslavement of Europeans was a major reason behind France’s invasion of Morocco in 1830.

It’s noteworthy that the Europeans, Obama’s exclusive target of condemnation for slavery, were subjected to Islamic enslavement in the cruelest form for some eight centuries, before they themselves embarked on the practice—the widely condemned trans-Atlantic slave-trade.

Moreover, even in the European slave-trade in Africa, it was Muslims—the well-established masters of slave-hunting, -breeding and -trading for many centuries—who supplied over 80% of the slaves to European traders, the latter mainly purchased and transported them. The European slave-trade only offered a stimulus and played a lucrative partner for Muslims to a long-established Islamic vocation in Africa.

What is accurate about Obama’s statement about slavery in Ghana is that European slavery was “where the journey of much of African-American experience began”. The cruel aspect aside, it left a positive end of some kind: the Black Diaspora in the new world, definitely more fortunate today than their left-behind brethren.

Yet, this is only half the truth. There was another African slave-journey—lasting longer and larger in magnitude—that began with the Arab Muslim invasion of Africa in the 7-8th century. And it has left behind no residue whatsoever, an extermination of human species of huge magnitude—thanks to universal castration of black male-slaves destined for Islamic markets.

The inhumanity of Islamic castration of immense number of African men wasn’t the robbing of their most natural identity and endowment, i.e. their manhood, alone, but mortality in castration was about 75 percent. Overall mortality-rate of black slaves headed to the Islamic world, from procurement to reaching the destination, was as high as 90%, but their mortality in transportation by Europeans to the New World was about 10 percent.

Obama’s condemnation of European-Christian slavery, a horror chapter in history, is laudable, but his exclusion of Islam, the crueler partner in the same crime, is not. It does gross injustice to those unfortunate souls that suffered from this tragic Islamic scourge. And those souls also include millions of Christian Europeans, his sole target of condemnation.

European slavery has been thoroughly condemned by all and sundry—Europeans or non-Europeans, Christians or Muslims, scholars or laymen. And despite, Europe’s singular and forceful role in its abolition and from where slavery has been effectively abolished, anti-slavery campaigners have long called today’s Europeans to assume greater responsibility for past slavery and take concrete actions, such as payment of reparations, to combat slavery’s destructive legacy. But Islam—whose role in slavery is much bigger, crueler, and more tragic—remains thoroughly untouched; as if Islam and its followers were/are untouched by the vice of slavery.

In fact, some Islamic countries (Mauritania, Saudi Arabia & Sudan) have continued practising slavery to this days, while Sudan has intensified it in recent decades, thanks to lack of criticism of Muslim engagement in slavery, whether historical or present. Some 600,000 souls in Mauritania remain shackled in continued slavery with no hope for liberation in sight, while tens of thousands of Christians, Animists and even Muslims have been kidnapped and reduced to slavery in Sudan since Islamists came to power in 1985 (Khan, Islamic Jihad, p. 347–49).

Nobel Laureate Professor Muhammad Yunus will inaugurate the exhibition as the chief guest. Senior photographers Mr. Bijon Sarkar and Mr. Naibuddin Ahmed will grace the event as the guests of honour. The photographic exhibition Perspectives comprises bodies of work by Pathshala’s graduating students. It portrays life on a bigger canvas with interpretations of faith, dreams, stigma, class diversity, social injustice and cultural changes.

A photo book Perspectives by the graduating students will also be launched at this event.

The exhibition will remain open for all till 12th August 2009, 3 pm to 9 pm every day.

Perspectives: Photography Exhibition

লন্ডন থেকে শাহাব উদ্দিন চঞ্চল

যুদ্ধ অপরাধীদের বিচার নিয়ে সরকারের পরিকল্পনা পরিষ্কার হচ্ছেনা।মনে হচ্ছে ৬ মাসেও সরকারের হ্যানিমুন শেষ হয় নাই।যুদ্ধ অপরাধীদের বিচার নিয়ে কি কোন নাটক হচ্ছে, না সত্যি সত্যি তাদের বিচার হবে এটা নিয়ে আস্তে আস্তে জল্পনা শুরু হতে চলেছে।পরিষ্কার না হওয়া পর্যন্ত জনগণকে বিভ্রান্ত করার চেষ্টা খুবই জোরে শুরে চালানো হচ্ছে।আমরা বেশ শঙ্কিত, সরকারের ক্ষমতা গ্রহন করার পর পিলখানা হত্যা কান্ডের কারণ যে ভাবে ব্যাখা করেন না কেন, জনগণ ভাল করে জানেন আসলে এটা একটা হুমকি।এটা করানোর কারণ হলো সরকার যুদ্ধ অপরাধীদের বিচারের ইসুটিতে যাতে হাত না দেয়।এই হুমকিতে ভয় পেয়ে যদি সরকার সাহসী ভুমিকা নিতে না পারে তাহলে মনে রাখবেন হিন্দি ডায়লক-টি যো ডর গিয়া সমজো মর গিয়া। ইসুটি এক্কুনি যদি হাত না দেন তা হলে এই সরকারের খবর আছে দেশের ভবিষ্যত আফগানিস্তান।ধামা চাপা দিয়ে যুদ্ধ অপরাধীদের বিচারের নাম নিয়ে কেউ যাতে চিনি মিনি বা লোকচূরি খেলা না খেলেন।যদি আপনারা না পারেন জনগণের কাছে আপনাদের জবাব কি?এত বড় ম্যানড্যট নিয়ে আপনারা ক্ষমতায় গেছেন।আপনাদের ইসতেহারের উপর ভিত্তি করে জনগণ আপনাদের ভোট দিয়েছে দয়াকরে যুদ্ধ অপরাধীদের বিচারটা করেন সব কিছুর আগে।এদেশের মানুষ আর ধোকা বাজি চায়না,মুক্তি যুদ্ধের পক্ষের না বিপক্ষের দল ক্ষমতায় এটা দেখার সময় নেই স্বাধীনতার ৩৮ বছর পর।সোজা কথা এখন যদি এদের বিচার না করেন তাহলে রাজাকাররা আপনাদের বিচার করবে এটাতো আপনারাও জানেন।আর আপনাদের মধ্যে যারা রাজাকার আর যুদ্ধ অপরাধীদের সাথে ব্যবসা বানিজ্য নিয়ে কাপুরুষের মত আওয়ামী লীগের বড় বড় পদ নিয়ে বসে আছেন,যুদ্ধ অপরাধীদের কে টাকা পয়সা দিয়ে গোপনে তাদের সাথে যোগাযোগ করে বলেন, আরে যা আমার সাথে নেতা নেত্রীর ভাল সম্পর্ক তোদের কিছুই হবেনা,সরকার কি এর কোন খবর রাখেন।বিদেশে নেতা নেত্রীরা আসলে টিভি সামনে ধাক্কা ধাক্কি করে নেতা নেত্রীর সাথে সামনে গিয়ে বসার কারণ হলো একটা বিনা পয়সায় এডভারটাইজমেন্ট আর এটাকে ব্যবহার করা হয় ভিন্ন ভাবে।এরাই যুদ্ধ অপরাধীদের সাহাস যোগাচ্ছে, আর তাদের সাথে জমি জমা থেকে শূরু করে আইনি বেআইনি কোন ব্যবসা বাদ নাই। এটা একটা বিরাট ফ্যাক্টর যা কোন এক সময় মত ব্যাখা করার ইচ্ছা আছে। তবে বিষয়টি মোটেই হালকা করে দেখলে বিরাট ভূল হবে, কারণ এরা মোনাফেক এদের চেনা সহজ নয়।এরা কারো নয়,এরা তাদের নিজের,এই যুদ্ধ অপরাধীদের বিচারের ইসুতে এদের বেলা একটা হুশিয়ারী সংকেত আগাম জানালাম বিষয়টা ভেবে দেখবেন।জনগন এবার সচেতন, সরকারের কর্ম কান্ড আর যুদ্ধ অপরাধীদের কলা কৌশল ভাল করে বুঝতে পারছে।মনে রাখবেন জনগনও আপনাদের ছাড়বেনা যাদি আপনারা পানি ঘোলা করার আগে বিচার না করেন।এখানে বিদেশীদের মত নেয়ার কি আছে,এত চামচামি ভালনা।যুদ্ধ অপরাধীদের বিচার করবো আমরা এখানে পেকি পররাস্ট্র মন্ত্রী এ বিষয়ে কথা বলার কে? জুজুর ভয় আর দেখাবেন না,যে সৌদি আরব সব লোক দেশে পাঠিয়ে দিবে।আমরা জানি হায়াত মউত আর রেজেকের মালিক আল্লা।সৌদি আরব আমাদের রেজেক দাতা নয়।এই সব প্রপগান্ডা শুনে,লাভ নাই,জনগণ খুব সচেতন।আপনাদের একটা কথা মনে রাখতে হবে ডিজিট্যাল বাংলাদেশ করার কথা বলছেন নির্বাচনের আগে ম্যানুফেষ্টতে,আপনারা আপনাদের কথা রাখেন প্লিজ।এদের বিচারের কাট গড়ায় জন্য করান, মামলা কে করবে বা না করবে এ নিয়ে সময় নষ্ট করে লাভ কি? কথায় বলেনা-কানা মনে মনে জানা, কারা অপরাধী আর কারা অপরাধী না এটা তো সারা দেশ জানে।পৃথিবী এখন মানুষের ফিঙ্গারের চাপের মধ্যে,এই ২১ শতাব্দিতে আর মানুষকে বোকা বানানোর চেষ্ঠা করা ঠিক নয়।প্রধানমন্ত্রী শেখ হাসিনার সাদাকে সাদা আর কালো কে কালো বলার পরমুলায় যান।ডু অর ডাই,ভদ্র মহিলাকে সকলে সাহায্য করলে তিনি আরেও সাহস পাবেন।আমরা একটা স্বাধীন জাতি স্বাধীন দেশ,আমাদের প্রচলিত আইনে যা আছে তা দিয়েই বিচারের কাজ শুরূ করেন।এতে অন্য কারো লাক গলানোর তো কিছু আমরা দেখি না।দেশের জনগণকে বলেছিলেন,আমরা ক্ষমতায় গেলে যুদ্ধ অপরাধীদের বিচার করবো যদি আপনারা আমাদের ভোট দেন,জনগণ আপনাদের ডাকে সাড়া দিয়েছে,শুধু সাড়া নয় এমন ভাবে দিয়েছে যে আপনাদের আর কারো দিকে তাকাতে হবেনা এত শক্তি দেয়ার পর যদি আপনারা এখনও চিন্তা করেন তা হলেতো জনগণ এবং রাজাকার সবই একত্র হয়ে যাবে যুদ্ধ অপরাধীদের পরিবর্তে আপনাদের বিচার করতে। সুতরাং চয়েজ ইজ ইওরস্।বঙ্গবন্ধু বলেছিলেন আমি মুসলমান,মুসলমান এক বার মরে বার বার নয়।আর আমরা যদি বঙ্গবন্ধুর সত্যিকারের আদর্শের সৈনিক হই তা হলে প্রমাণ দিতে হবে আমাদের,আমরা ভিতু জাতি নয়।বঙ্গবন্ধু যা বলেতেন তা তিনি করতেন,তার আদর্শের সৈনিক গণ মুখে আদর্শের কথা বলে-আর অন্তরে বিলাই মনোভাব নিয়ে বসে থাকলে চলবে না।ডিজিট্যাল বাংলাদেশ গড়তে হলে যুদ্ধ অপরাধীদের বিচার ছাড়া সম্ভব নয়।কারণ তারা ডিজিট্যাল বাংলাদেশ গড়তে দিবে না এটা আপনারা ভাল করে জানেন,অতএব আল্লাওয়াস্তে সব কিছুর আগে ওদের বিচার টা করেন।দেখবেন দেশের মানুষ দেশকে আরো বেশী ভালবাসবে,দেশের জন্য কাজ করতে সাহস পাবে দূর্নীতি করতে সাহস পাবে না।যে দেশে বিচার নাই এদেশের লোক দেশকে ভালবাসে না দেশের জন্য কাজ করতে চায়না,মনের মধ্যে দ্বিধা থাকে স্বাধীন ভাবে কাজ করতে পারে না,একে অন্যেকে বিশ্বাস করে না,যার যা ইচ্ছা তা করে,জোর যার মুলুক তার যে দেশে সেই দেশের মানুষ সভ্য থাকেনা, সভ্যতার ধার ধারে না।দেশের মানুষকে সুস্থ রাখতে না পারলে সুস্থ চিন্তা সম্ভব নয়,আর সুস্থ মানষিকতা ছাড়া দেশ গড়া ডিজিট্যাল বাংলাদেশ করা সম্ভব নয়।আপনারা যারা বড় বড় আসনে আছেন দয়া করে সাহসী হোন, বিচারকের আসনে সাহসী মানুষদের বসান, তৃতীয় বিশ্বে সাহসী বিচারক ছাড়া ন্যায় বিচার করতে পরেনা।যারা বিব্রত বোধ করেন প্রানের ভয়ে বা লোভের কারণে এদের দিয়ে এসব কাজ করানো যাবে না।আমার এই লেখা কোন উপদেশ মুলক নয়,এটা জনগণের দাবি,আপনারাদের উপদেশ দেবার মত আমার কোন বিদ্যা বুদ্ধি নেই।আমি যা মনে করি তা লিখছি আপনাদের হয়তো পছন্দ না লাগতে পারে কিন্তু তবুও বলবো রাগ করবেন না,এটা জনগণের মনের কথা এবং আমাদের গণতান্ত্রিক অধিকার।আমরা মনে করি অন্ন বস্ত্র শিক্ষা বাসস্তান দেশের বড় বড় ব্রিজ ইলেকট্রিক আর কলকারখানা সব কিছুর কথা ভুলে যান কিছুদিনের জন্য।কথা গুলো পছন্দ হবে না জানি,কত যুক্তি দেখাবেন বলবেন আরামে আছেন এই জন্য বলছেন এইতো! বলেন-বলতে থাকেন আমরা ৭১ এ এর চেয়ে হাজার গূন বেশী কষ্ট করেছি শুধু মাত্র এই যুদ্ধ অপরাধীদের কারণে।পড়া শুনা থেকে শুরু করে খাদ্য বস্ত্র কিছুই পাইনা,রাতের ঘুম ছিলনা এক মুহুর্ত শান্তিতে ছিলাম না।কোন সময় এই রাজাকারের বাচ্চারা পেকি সেনাদের নিয়ে বাড়ি ঘরে হানা দিবে,মা বোনদের ইজ্জতের উপর হামলা চালাবে, চোরের মত আমাদের থাকতে হয়েছে তাদের ভয়ে।কত যে অসহায় আবস্থায় আমরা ছিলাম তা এখন বলার দরকার নেই।যন্ত্রনা বলতে আমরা কি সহ্য করি নাই, রক্তের সাথে হুলি খেলা দেখেছি,বাবার সামনে মেয়েকে রেপ করার চিত্র দেখিছি. ৭১এ মুক্তিযুদ্ধ সময় কালিন পেকি হানাদারদের সাথে যারা নরহত্যা করতে সাহায্য করেছে তারা এখনও এদেশে বহাল তবিয়তে ঘুরে বেড়াচ্ছে এটা কোন দেশ।যে দেশে বিচার নাই,বিচার হলে রায় কার্যকর হয়না আবার অপরাধীকে অপরাধী বলা যাবে না, চোর কে চোর বলা যাবেনা,অপরাধীদের কাঠ গড়ায় দাড় করানোর কথা উঠলে অন্যদেশ হস্তক্ষেপ করে হোয়াটসৃ দেট। এর পর আবার ধমক দেয় বিচার হলে এই করবো সেই করবো আর আমরা হাতে চুড়ি পরে বসে থাকবো,আমতা আমতা করে দায়সাড়া ভাবে সময় নষ্ঠ করব,মাননীয় মন্ত্রী মহোদয় দেশের কি উন্নতি করতে সত্যিই চান? তা হলে দয়া করে আপনারা কারো কথায় আর-কান না দিয়ে আমরা যারা আপনাদের হাতে দায়িত্ব দিয়েছি আমাদের কথা গুলো একটু ভেবে দেখুন।মনে রাখবেন আপনাদের করতেই হবে যুদ্ধ অপরাধীদের বিচার, নইলে কি হবে তা তো নিশ্চয়ই ভাল করে জানেন। এই অপরাধীদের ভয়ে পদত্যাগ করতে চাইলেও ক্ষমা পাবেন না,আপনাদের বিচার করতেই হবে।আগেই বলেছি আমাদের উন্নতির দরকার নেই,আমাদের হাদিস দলিল আর মানবতার কথা কল্যানের কথা স্বর্গে যাবার কথা আর শুনতে চাই না।এখন বিচার করলে দেশে অশান্তি হবে অরাজকতা সৃস্টি হবে অনেক কষ্ট হবে দেশের মানুষের উন্নতি হবে না এই বলে ইয়াংদের ভয় দেখাবেন না আর বিভ্রান্ত করবেন না।এবারের নির্বাচনে আমাদের ইয়াং জেনারেশন বুজতে পেরেছে ভাল করে, তারা আমাদের সন্তান তারাও অনেক সহ্য করেছে।যুদ্ধ অপরাধীদের মুখ থেকে হেভেন হেলের কথা অনেক শুনেছি, দেশের মানুষ এখন ভাল করে বুঝতে পেরেছে এই সব শয়তানদের মতলব।অতএব এখন এতদিন পর রিয়েলাইজ করেছে বলেই আপনাদেরকে সরকার গঠন করতে সহযোগিতা করেছে।এই জেনারেশনের অবশ্যই সহ্য করার ক্ষমতা আর মানসিকতা আছে বলেই তারা এবার সিদ্ধান্ত নিয়েছে আপনারা বিরোধী দলে গেলে তাদের অবস্থা টাইট হবে আর সরকার গঠন করলে এট লিষ্ট আশা থাকবে বাকি জেনারেশন পৃথিবীতে গর্ব করে বাঙালী হিসাবে বেচে থাকবে।এই ১কোটি ৪০ লক্ষ ভোটার কিন্তু ৭১ দেখে নাই,আধুনিক জগতের সাথে তাদের পরিচয় করিয়ে দিয়েছে আজকের ইলেকট্রনিক মিডিয়া।এরই সুবাদে তারা জানতে পেরেছে আসলে ৭১ কি হয়েছিল বা তার আগে বঙ্গবন্ধুর সমগ্র আন্দোলন আর রাজাকার এবং যুদ্ধ অপরাধীদের ভুমিকা কি ছিল।আয়নার মত পরিষ্কার যুদ্ধ অপরাধীদের সমস্ত কিছু,তারা তা ও জানে হঠাত করে ক্যন্টম্যান্ট থেকে মেজর জিয়া চট্টগ্রামের কালুরঘাট এলাকায় কেরোসিনের তেলের ড্রামের উপর দাড়িয়ে স্বাধীনতা ঘোষনা করে ছিলেন আর জনগণ সাথে সাথে যুদ্ধ শুরু করে দিলো?৭৫ এ বঙ্গবন্ধুকে স্বপরিবারে হত্যা করে যুদ্ধ অপরাধীদের এদেশে পূর্ণবাসন কে করলো?গোলাম আযমকে নাগরিকত্ব কে দিয়েছিল?রাজাকারদের সাথে ক্ষমতায় বসে ইতিহাস বিকৃত কে করলো?ইলেক্ট্রনিক মিডিয়ার বদৌলতে ৪৭ থেকে ২০০৭ পর্যন্ত আসল ইতিহাস আর তাদেরকে ম্যানুয়েলি বুঝাতে হবেনা।১৯৭১ এর ৭ই মার্চ রের্সকোর্স ময়দানের লক্ষ লক্ষ জনতার মাঝে মঞ্চে দাড়িয়ে হাজার বছরের শ্রেষ্ট বাঙালী জাতির জনক বঙ্গবন্ধুর এবারের সংগ্রাম স্বাধীনতার সংগ্রাম, এবারের সংগ্রাম মুক্তির সংগ্রাম।বলতে হবে না স্বাধীনতার ঘোষক কে, এনিয়ে আর সময় নষ্ট করতে হবে না।যা জানার আর বুঝার এ প্রজন্ম বুঝে গেছে আমাদের আর বুঝাতে হবে না।দেশের কোটি কোটি টাকা বিদেশে কে পাচার করেছে, দেশ প্রেমিকদের দেশ প্রেমের উদাহরণ আর জানাতে হবে না,উন্নয়নের জোয়ারে দেশ ভেসে গেছে রগ কাটার আর বোমা মারার কারখানা কে বা কার তৈরি করেছে, এক যোগে ৬৩ জেলায় বোমা ফাটানো, মুতিয়া (প্রশ্রাব নয়) রাজাকারের বাংলা ভাই মিডিয়ার আবিষ্কার, ধর্ম ব্যবসায়ী সাইদি বিলেতে বাঙালীদের কাছে সি ত্রো উলঙ্গ ময়লানা(মেয়েদের কাপড়ের নিচে থাকানোর কারনে মাপ চেয়েছিল) নামে পরিচিত এরা কারা।তাদেরকে আর নতুন করে পরিচয় করিয়ে দিতে হবে না, সব কিছুই দেশ আর জাতি জানে এবং বুঝে,প্রতি দিন প্রতি মুহূর্তে শুনছে কে কি করেছেন, এখন আর সময় নষ্ঠ করার কিছু নাই শুরু করেন দেশের উন্নয়ন কর্ম কান্ড যুদ্ধ অপরাধীদের বিচারের মধ্যমে।এতে যা হবার হবে, এত ভাবনার কারণ কি? কেন আমরা এত কষ্ঠ সহ্য করেছিলাম।হ্যা সহ্য করেছিলাম আমারা যে কয়দিন বেচে থাকবো ভাল ভাবে বেচে থাকবো আগামী জেনারেশন নিয়ে স্বাধীন জাতি হিসাবে এই সুন্দর পৃথিবীতে।বঙ্গবন্ধু যে ডাক দিয়েছিলেন তার ডাকে আমরা যে ভাবে সাড়া দিয়েছিলাম।এবারও আমরা মনে করি আমাদের এই প্রজন্মও গত নির্বাচনের আগে ইসতেহার মোতাবেক বঙ্গবন্ধুর কন্যার ডাকে সাড়া দিয়েছে। এ প্রজন্ম যদি আমাদের সন্তান হয় তা হলে তারাও সহ্য করবে সাময়িক কিছু অনিয়ম আর ঝড় তুপান।হাতে চুড়ি পরে আর আমাদের বসার সময় নেই,আমাদের কি করতে হবে আপনারা বলেন আমরা আপনাদের সাথে ছিলাম আছি আর এবার কিন্তু ভূল করলে পারনতি ভয়াবহ।এখন আপনারা এই ভদ্র মহিলাকে দয়া করে মুক্তমনে মানবতা,দেশ ও জাতির কল্যানে সাহায্য করেন।বঙ্গ বন্ধুর অসমাপ্ত কাজ গুলো সমাপ্ত করে জাতিকে এগিয়ে নিয়ে যেতে যা করতে হয় তা করেন প্লিজ।সুতরাং দোহাই আমাদের কর্তা মহোদয় ডোন্ট ওয়েষ্ট টাইম.উই ডোন্ট ওয়ান্ট এনআদার ১৫ আগস্ট