By Scott Gilmore / The Boston Globe
LAST MONTH IN DHAKA, the capital of Bangladesh, six men
pounded on the door of Xulhaz Mannan, an employee of the US embassy. When he
opened, they hacked him and a friend to death with machetes. A group affiliated
with Al Qaeda claimed responsibility, condemning the men for their gay rights
activism.
Brutal attacks like this are increasingly common in
Bangladesh. According to a recent internal memo from the United Nations
Department of Safety and Security, there have been 30 similar extremist attacks
since January 2015, resulting in 23 deaths and more than 140 injured. Western
governments are increasingly worried, saying the country of 168 million people
is starting to come undone.
As a state, Bangladesh is not very old. It was born by
breaking away from Pakistan in 1971 in a brief and violent civil war. In that
conflict, the Pakistani army or its proxy Islamic militia Jamaat-e-Islami
killed 300,000 to 500,000 people by independent estimates. After that, Bangladesh
largely slipped off the radar screen for most of the Western world. Only the
occasional cyclone would grab our brief attention.
Yet, as unlucky as the country seemed, the last 40 years
have been good to Bangladesh on many fronts. It is not blessed with many
natural resources, but it does have people. Their low wages began to attract
garment manufacturers who built factories and paid taxes. The GDP per capita
tripled. Hospitals were built, and schools improved. Life expectancy increased
by a stunning 20 years, and child mortality rates dropped by a factor of four.
Politically, Bangladesh did not do as well. Each newly
elected government competed to out do the last in terms of corruption and
nepotism; their efforts only interrupted by the occasional coup and
counter-coup. Not surprisingly, Transparency International ranks it among the
world’s most corrupt countries, and the Social Progress Index places it near
the bottom for personal rights and freedoms.
Nonetheless, Bangladesh has been a relative success story in
comparison to much of the rest of the Muslim world. While Indonesia was wracked
by ethnic violence, the Middle East and Afghanistan suffered through war after
war, and Pakistan descended into chaos, Bangladesh quietly stumbled forward,
just functional enough to lift 60 million people out of extreme poverty.
MY FIRST TRIP to Dhaka was over a decade ago, as a diplomat.
My agenda was overwhelmingly focused on aid — how much western money should be
sent to help the country leave the ranks of what the World Banks calls the
“Least Developed Countries.” Then the city was large, sprawling, and flat.
There were no high-rises, few visible factories, and more rickshaws than
automobiles.
The sprawl was still there when I returned last month but so
too were shiny glass-shod hotels, towering office buildings, and large garment
factories. The streets were clogged with traffic, the airport was busy, and
almost no one was talking about aid or poverty. The topic now is economic
growth: Is it moving fast enough? Will it continue? And will the new violence
threaten this progress?
A fire requires three elements: fuel, heat, and oxygen. In
the last two years, all three have come to Bangladesh, and the resulting flames
are starting to get out of control.
The oxygen is coming from the collapse of the democratic
process. Since the civil war, the Bangladesh Nationalist Party, or BNP, and the
Awami League have dominated politics. The BNP are an Islamist party, and these
are not good days for them. They boycotted the last election, which handed the
Awami League a massive majority. Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina is using her
newfound power to crush all opposition groups — to such an extent that some
observers argue Bangladesh can no longer be considered a democracy.
Hasina has jailed journalists, closed TV stations and
newspapers, charged opposition politicians with sedition, corruption, and
fraud. Perhaps most notably, Hasina decided it was time to settle scores dating
back to the civil war and launched a war crimes trial against leaders of the
now banned Jamaat-e-Islami movement, men who had since been rehabilitated into
politicians.
Earlier this month, a trial that Human Rights Watch
described as “neither free nor fair” found the 73-year-old head of the party,
Motiur Rahman Nizami, guilty of genocide, rape, and killing intellectuals
during the civil war. He was hanged just days after the verdict. His supporters
and other opponents to the government have been effectively pushed off the
public stage, onto the streets, and into the shadows.
Fuel for the conflagration is unemployed young men. In
Bangladesh, one of the lowest rates of employment is found among well-educated
(and therefore relatively well-off) youth. While economic growth has been
impressive, it has only barely kept up with birth rates, and opportunities for
more advanced careers beyond the garment factories are too few.
And the ignition is coming from the Middle East.
Saudi-funded Wahhabi mosques and madrassas have been preaching the same radical
theology that has set Pakistan and Afghanistan alight. Bengali diaspora working
in Saudi Arabia and other gulf states, have returned with more conservative
religious views and brought Al Qaeda and the Islamic State.
IN A RECENT article published by the Islamic State’s English
language magazine Dabiq, the “Amir” in Bangladesh explained the country’s
strategic importance as a launch pad for jihad against the Indian “masses of
cow-worshiping, pagan Hindus” to the west and Burmese Buddhists to the east.
ISIS believes the barriers to achieving that goal include the Bengali
government, moderate Muslims, foreigners, and any religious minority.
A senior Western ambassador in Bangladesh described al Qaeda
and ISIS to me as “the sexiest thing going” for radicalized youth who have seen
the traditional opposition organizations crushed by the government. The
fundamentalist propaganda coming from the Middle East, increasingly being
published in Bengali, offers them the dramatic promise of a more meaningful
life fighting the enemies of Islam. That is far more interesting than
supporting a local political candidate who will probably end up in jail on
well-earned corruption charges.
The results of all this have been sporadic but noticeable and
deadly. Many of the first attacks used knives and machetes. In January of last
year a Hindu lecturer at a medical college was stabbed to death by four young
men as she waited for a rickshaw. Her crime had been to insist that her
students obey the institution’s dress code and not wear hijabs.
But guns have begun to emerge as well: In September of last
year an Italian aid worker was shot while jogging through Dhaka’s diplomatic
quarter. Five days later an elderly Japanese businessman was killed while visiting
his rural agricultural business in northern Bangladesh.
The violence continues to escalate. A series of bomb attacks
have been launched against Hindus and minority Shias. Only one of these was a
suicide attack, but in recent months police have begun to find suicide vests
when raiding radical cells.
The government has moved slowly to douse the flames. In
public they downplay the violence and adamantly deny the presence of the
Islamic State and al Qaeda. Even in private, they will only go so far as to concede
there may be “sympathizers.” A UN security analyst based in Dhaka explained
that this was likely due to two factors. The government does not want to lose
face by admitting they have a problem on their hands, one that they have
evidently not been able to contain. They may also be motivated by a desire not
to open a second front with Bengali Islamists who are already being agitated by
the war crimes tribunals.
BANGLADESH IS A fragile state, and it could crumble easily.
The government systems are not especially robust. While they inherited the same
British colonial system that India did, Bangladesh was never more than an
outlying province of the Raj and was neglected accordingly. Since independence,
the judiciary, and the police in particular, have struggled to develop.
Against this backdrop of fragility, the unwillingness of
Bengali officials to acknowledge the growth of violent extremism in Bangladesh
or to do much about it looks like a disaster, according to western diplomats.
They fear a strategy of ignoring it and hoping it will go away or of more
deliberate appeasement will only end badly. As a result, there has been a
steady flow of American, Canadian, and European officials to Dhaka, hoping to
cajole the government into action.
In late March the United States Department of Homeland
Security and the Federal Aviation Authority sent senior officials to push the
Bangladesh government towards more cooperation. Earlier this month it was the
turn of US Assistant Secretary of State Nisha Desai Biswal. She was also there
to talk about improving collaboration on counter-terrorism and extremism.
There are also reports Canada (which is increasingly
concerned about the radicalization of their Bengali diaspora) recently sent the
head of its intelligence agency to Bangladesh. In March, the United Kingdom
banned cargo on direct flights from Dhaka, and the Australian Embassy has been
designated “non-accompanied” meaning it is no longer safe enough to bring
families.
While things in Bangladesh could likely get worse, few
predict it will get as bad as Pakistan or Syria for example. Bangladesh is a
relatively homogenous country, and there are few social, cultural, or religious
divides large enough to threaten widespread violence.
But the growing extremism is scaring investors and
threatening the economy. Bengalis have grown accustomed to high levels of
economic growth (predicted to reach 7 percent this year) that has given people
the constant hope of greater affluence, renting a bigger apartment, or
purchasing a new motorbike. If that promise of a better life evaporated, one of
the precious few islands of peace in the Muslim world could be completely
destabilized.
-
Scott Gilmore is a senior fellow at the Munk
School of Global Affairs, the founder of the nonprofit Building Market, and a
former diplomat.
No comments:
Post a Comment