Bangladeshi journalist Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury returned to Washington after a two-year absence the first week in November; and as he had been in the past was greeted as a hero. Although the editor and publisher of Dhaka’s Weekly Blitz, had received the same welcome in the United States capital before, this one was fraught with added significance.
Numerous US officials are by now familiar with Shoaib’s plight. In 2003, Bangladeshi officials arrested him for intending to travel to Israel, exposing the rise of Islamic radicals in Bangladesh, urging Dhaka-Jerusalem relations, and advocating genuine interfaith dialogue based on mutual respect. He was held and tortured for 17 months before the government released him on bail; something they would not have done without my own intervention and that of US Congressman Mark Kirk, now the leading candidate for President Barack Obama’s former Senate seat. By the time of Shoaib’s release, several Bangladeshi officials had admitted to me and to US officials that there was no substance to the charges and that they were maintained “only for fear of what the radicals would do” if they were dropped in accordance with Bangladeshi law. In a 2005 meeting, the Bangladeshi ambassador told Kirk and me that the case “is purely a personal financial dispute.” He then promised that the government would drop the admittedly false charges “soon.” That was six and a half years ago, and the charges remain. In the meantime, Shoaib has been attacked by radicals and agents of the government. Last year, he was abducted by RAB and held for three hours before—again—our intervention forced them to release him and admit to planting false evidence. Shoaib continues to face charges of sedition, treason, and blasphemy for such things as—and this is according to the court—“praising Christians and Jews.” One can only imagine how that sits with US lawmakers charged with deciding matters like appropriations, tariffs, and bi-lateral relations between the US and Bangladesh.
While in the nation’s capital, Shoaib met with several of those US officials, as well as US government agencies charged with monitoring human rights around the world. One of those agencies, the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom USCIRF), has been following the case almost since the beginning. In a meeting we had with them, Commission members and staffs were extremely concerned that Shoaib continues to face these charges, even though the Bangladeshi government has failed to produce a shred of credible evidence in the six years plus the case has been active. As Shoaib answered questions about the legal proceedings—and how they have become more intense and more frequent since the new government took power—we could see our audience writing feverishly, notes that ultimately would enter into their judgments about Bangladesh’s commitment to human rights and religious freedom. Follow that discussion, I provided USCIRF with verified documentation of increased attacks on minorities in Bangladesh since January. USCIRF is charged under US law “to monitor the status of freedom of thought, conscience, and religion or belief abroad, as defined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and related international instruments, and to give independent policy recommendations to the President, the Secretary of State, and the Congress.”
USCIRF’s concerns take on an even greater significance after the Commission upgraded Bangladesh’s status after the free and fair elections that returned the nation to democratic rule. The change was not only a recognition of that return but also done in expectation that the new Awami League government would put an end to the sort of human rights abuses from which Bangladeshis had suffered in the past. The fact that things have not improved, and in fact have worsened, is the cause of a great deal of concern.
That same concern was evident as Shoaib and I met with individual lawmakers and their staffs. For some time, Shoaib has enjoyed a great deal of support in the United States Congress, as evidence by the 2007 Congressional vote expressing that support. The tally was 409 to 1 in favor of the legislation that has remained a lynchpin in stopping various pieces of legislation. Since that time, for instance, there have been at least six attempts in the United States House and Senate to pass legislation that would provide Bangladesh with tariff relief and trade benefits. As time passes, such relief becomes ever more critical to the Bangladeshi economy given the large US market for garments and other goods. Currently, however, Bangladesh is at a disadvantage compared to other garment exporting countries—like Guatemala and Honduras, which have a Free Trade Agreement with the United States; and exporting giants like India and China, which can undercut Bangladeshi pricing because of large volume. And in fact, each year, these nations get an ever-increasing share of the US garment market at Bangladesh’s expense.
We also met with staff of the Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission in the United States House of Representatives (TLHRC). The TLHRC is a non-partisan commission of Democrats and Republicans committed to investigating human rights abuses worldwide. Like USCIRF, the TLHRC has an impeccable reputation in Washington for being objective and having no particular ideology or agenda. Its findings are considered authoritative and often influence the way US lawmakers vote. Currently, the TLHRC is looking into the possibility of holding hearings on the oppression of minorities in Bangladesh and especially the current governments refusal to prosecute the perpetrators thereby giving a green light for further attacks.
Prior to January, Bangladeshi apologists often responded to US concerns about Shoaib’s persecution by attributing the human rights abuses to “previous governments” or “the BNP-Jamaat government.” And in fact, the propaganda line emanating from Bangladesh and its lobbyists has been that the current government is “different” and committed to move the country away from its more recent history of minority oppression and tacit support for Islamist radicals. The fact that, if anything, the opposite has turned out to be the case is extremely troubling for many in the United States. Consider Obama’s outreach to Muslim-majority countries and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s September meeting with Bangladeshi Foreign Minister Dipu Moni. While Clinton had kind words for Bangladesh, when the matter of trade and similar matters arose, she said she would “consider” it but indicted that nothing would be forthcoming soon. The actions of the current Bangladeshi government have almost killed the promise with which it was greeted by the United States and other countries.
In fact, most people see Washington today as a city struggling with a partisan split between Democrats and Republicans—and not only Americans. In 2006 and 2008, some people in Dhaka and at its embassy in Washington were openly cheering for Mark Kirk to be defeated in the Democratic victories that year. Instead, Shoaib Choudhury’s Congressional champion won re-election and emerged as one of the most powerful officials in Barack Obama’s home state. Yet, over the past several months, there has been increasing support for Shoaib and concern over the Awami League government’s oppression of minorities among the leadership in both parties; and during his Washington trip, Shoaib and I were invited to meet with them. The result: no matter how partisan things might get, Democrats and Republicans agree on at least one thing. The charges against Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury represent a serious human rights violation—even under Bangladesh’s own laws—and must be dropped before that country will see any increased aid, trade benefits, or expanded business relations.
Numerous US officials are by now familiar with Shoaib’s plight. In 2003, Bangladeshi officials arrested him for intending to travel to Israel, exposing the rise of Islamic radicals in Bangladesh, urging Dhaka-Jerusalem relations, and advocating genuine interfaith dialogue based on mutual respect. He was held and tortured for 17 months before the government released him on bail; something they would not have done without my own intervention and that of US Congressman Mark Kirk, now the leading candidate for President Barack Obama’s former Senate seat. By the time of Shoaib’s release, several Bangladeshi officials had admitted to me and to US officials that there was no substance to the charges and that they were maintained “only for fear of what the radicals would do” if they were dropped in accordance with Bangladeshi law. In a 2005 meeting, the Bangladeshi ambassador told Kirk and me that the case “is purely a personal financial dispute.” He then promised that the government would drop the admittedly false charges “soon.” That was six and a half years ago, and the charges remain. In the meantime, Shoaib has been attacked by radicals and agents of the government. Last year, he was abducted by RAB and held for three hours before—again—our intervention forced them to release him and admit to planting false evidence. Shoaib continues to face charges of sedition, treason, and blasphemy for such things as—and this is according to the court—“praising Christians and Jews.” One can only imagine how that sits with US lawmakers charged with deciding matters like appropriations, tariffs, and bi-lateral relations between the US and Bangladesh.
While in the nation’s capital, Shoaib met with several of those US officials, as well as US government agencies charged with monitoring human rights around the world. One of those agencies, the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom USCIRF), has been following the case almost since the beginning. In a meeting we had with them, Commission members and staffs were extremely concerned that Shoaib continues to face these charges, even though the Bangladeshi government has failed to produce a shred of credible evidence in the six years plus the case has been active. As Shoaib answered questions about the legal proceedings—and how they have become more intense and more frequent since the new government took power—we could see our audience writing feverishly, notes that ultimately would enter into their judgments about Bangladesh’s commitment to human rights and religious freedom. Follow that discussion, I provided USCIRF with verified documentation of increased attacks on minorities in Bangladesh since January. USCIRF is charged under US law “to monitor the status of freedom of thought, conscience, and religion or belief abroad, as defined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and related international instruments, and to give independent policy recommendations to the President, the Secretary of State, and the Congress.”
USCIRF’s concerns take on an even greater significance after the Commission upgraded Bangladesh’s status after the free and fair elections that returned the nation to democratic rule. The change was not only a recognition of that return but also done in expectation that the new Awami League government would put an end to the sort of human rights abuses from which Bangladeshis had suffered in the past. The fact that things have not improved, and in fact have worsened, is the cause of a great deal of concern.
That same concern was evident as Shoaib and I met with individual lawmakers and their staffs. For some time, Shoaib has enjoyed a great deal of support in the United States Congress, as evidence by the 2007 Congressional vote expressing that support. The tally was 409 to 1 in favor of the legislation that has remained a lynchpin in stopping various pieces of legislation. Since that time, for instance, there have been at least six attempts in the United States House and Senate to pass legislation that would provide Bangladesh with tariff relief and trade benefits. As time passes, such relief becomes ever more critical to the Bangladeshi economy given the large US market for garments and other goods. Currently, however, Bangladesh is at a disadvantage compared to other garment exporting countries—like Guatemala and Honduras, which have a Free Trade Agreement with the United States; and exporting giants like India and China, which can undercut Bangladeshi pricing because of large volume. And in fact, each year, these nations get an ever-increasing share of the US garment market at Bangladesh’s expense.
We also met with staff of the Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission in the United States House of Representatives (TLHRC). The TLHRC is a non-partisan commission of Democrats and Republicans committed to investigating human rights abuses worldwide. Like USCIRF, the TLHRC has an impeccable reputation in Washington for being objective and having no particular ideology or agenda. Its findings are considered authoritative and often influence the way US lawmakers vote. Currently, the TLHRC is looking into the possibility of holding hearings on the oppression of minorities in Bangladesh and especially the current governments refusal to prosecute the perpetrators thereby giving a green light for further attacks.
Prior to January, Bangladeshi apologists often responded to US concerns about Shoaib’s persecution by attributing the human rights abuses to “previous governments” or “the BNP-Jamaat government.” And in fact, the propaganda line emanating from Bangladesh and its lobbyists has been that the current government is “different” and committed to move the country away from its more recent history of minority oppression and tacit support for Islamist radicals. The fact that, if anything, the opposite has turned out to be the case is extremely troubling for many in the United States. Consider Obama’s outreach to Muslim-majority countries and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s September meeting with Bangladeshi Foreign Minister Dipu Moni. While Clinton had kind words for Bangladesh, when the matter of trade and similar matters arose, she said she would “consider” it but indicted that nothing would be forthcoming soon. The actions of the current Bangladeshi government have almost killed the promise with which it was greeted by the United States and other countries.
In fact, most people see Washington today as a city struggling with a partisan split between Democrats and Republicans—and not only Americans. In 2006 and 2008, some people in Dhaka and at its embassy in Washington were openly cheering for Mark Kirk to be defeated in the Democratic victories that year. Instead, Shoaib Choudhury’s Congressional champion won re-election and emerged as one of the most powerful officials in Barack Obama’s home state. Yet, over the past several months, there has been increasing support for Shoaib and concern over the Awami League government’s oppression of minorities among the leadership in both parties; and during his Washington trip, Shoaib and I were invited to meet with them. The result: no matter how partisan things might get, Democrats and Republicans agree on at least one thing. The charges against Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury represent a serious human rights violation—even under Bangladesh’s own laws—and must be dropped before that country will see any increased aid, trade benefits, or expanded business relations.
No comments:
Post a Comment