The attacks were a product of fractious politics

Meenakshi Ganguly, South Asia Director, Human Rights Watch

Many attending the vigil at London’s Trafalgar Square following the Dhaka attack were more than a little red-eyed with despair. All of us who had worked in the country watched the grim hostage crisis play out in a city so familiar, at a restaurant many of us had frequented. By the time security forces stormed in—killing most of the gunmen—21 hostages and two police officers were dead.

At the gathering, most talked about Faraz Hossain, a young Bangladeshi man who the attackers allegedly offered freedom. He chose not to leave because they had refused to release his two friends, non-Bangladeshi women. People spoke of the choices young people make, contrasting Faraz with the attackers, also men in their twenties, who too belonged to affluent Bangladeshi families. They chose instead to carry out a massacre.

Though there is no evidence at this point that the Islamic State was involved in ordering or assisting in this latest massacre, the organization has claimed responsibility for the attack. ISIL is always happy to embrace those who say they carried out such senseless acts of violence on its behalf. The Bangladeshi government denies any links to ISIL, however. “They are members of the Jamaeytul Mujahdeen Bangladesh,” or JMB, home minister Asaduzzaman Khan has stated, referring to a domestic militant group. “They have no connections with the [Islamic State].”

Unfortunately, many in Bangladesh and abroad find it just as hard to have faith in government assertions. Bangladesh has been locked in a bitter dispute between the ruling Awami League party and two opposition groups, the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) and the Jamaat-e-Islami. Violence has broken out at opposition street protests, while the government responded with arrests, enforced disappearances, and extrajudicial killings.

Prime minister Sheikh Hasina’s government has been in denial about the possibility of international involvement in attacks over the past two years on bloggers, secularists, academics, and members of the LGBTQ community, among others, apparently unwilling to envision any threat other than that from the political opposition.

This blinkered approach has meant that the government has simply stood by as assaults by Islamist groups escalate, from machete attacks on bloggers to the latest hostage situation. It led officials to effectively blame the victims by recommending that writers engage in self-censorship in order to avoid offending extremist Muslims. The attacks became more frequent in recent months, with religious minorities targeted, as well as gay-rights activists.

Until the wife of a police officer was killed, the government did little to investigate the attacks or to identify and prosecute the perpetrators. Under international pressure following the killing of two gay-rights activists, the government randomly arrested over 15,000 people, many of them suspected supporters of the opposition, particularly madrassa-affiliated members of Jamaat’s student wing. Several of them were members of the JMB, the authorities said, a group which has been banned for more than a decade and yet is now suspected by the government to be behind the Dhaka attack.

A few of the attackers who were caught after allegedly committing the machete attacks mysteriously died while in the custody of security forces. Bangladeshi security forces are notorious for extrajudicial executions popularly known as “crossfire killings,” which they falsely claim are carried out in self-defense when security forces return the alleged suspect to the scene of the crime. Even senior members of the police admit these executions are routine, yet they have persisted under Awami League and BNP governments alike, leading to a vicious circle between the government of the day and opponents.

It is into this space that organized violence has grown and spread.

At the vigil, people wondered if the truth would ever come out. Who organized these killings? How did the killers become radicalized? And how will it end? Will the country’s political leaders finally unite to address the threat of violent crime by fundamentalists that afflicts people across party lines?

What is needed now is responsible, rights-respecting governance, proper investigations, and an end to political mudslinging. Do Sheikh Hasina and Bangladesh’s other leaders have the political courage to put their country and people ahead of their personal and party self-interest? Thus far, the indications are not encouraging.

Governments with strong ties to Bangladesh—and especially those with a history of bilateral cooperation and technical trainings, including to security forces—need to speak up now. The United States, the United Kingdom, and India, to start. It is time encourage the Bangladeshi government to adopt human rights-respecting strategies to address these terrible attacks, and to prevent future ones.

Time is running out. On July 8, three people were killed at a Bangladesh checkpoint when gunmen carrying bombs tried to attack a gathering to mark the Muslim Eid holiday.

ISIS threat rising in Bangladesh, experts say

By Nicole Ireland / CBC News

"The Islamic State is expanding its reach around the globe, and its latest focus is on Bangladesh," the report warned.

Those words were published by Stratfor, a global intelligence company based in Austin, Texas, on April 26 — more than two months before militants killed 20 hostages in a restaurant in Dhaka, the Bangladesh capital, and ISIS claimed responsibility.

On Thursday, extremists struck again, hurling homemade bombs at police guarding an Eid-al-Fitr prayer service to mark the end of the Muslim holy month of Ramadan in Kishoreganj district, about 90 kilometres north of Dhaka. Four people died, including one of the attackers, and more than a dozen others were injured. 

There was no immediate claim of responsibility, but after the restaurant attack, ISIS threatened more violence in Bangladesh.  

"There's definitely a groundswell of jihadism there," said Scott Stewart, Stratfor's vice-president of tactical analysis and a former special agent with the U.S. State Department.

The Bangladeshi government has denied ISIS was responsible for either of the recent attacks, blaming them on domestic militant groups. But terrorism experts, including Stewart, disagree, saying that such groups within Bangladesh are likely affiliated with ISIS or rival organization al-Qaeda.

ISIS has ruthlessly targeted Muslims, particularly Shia, it deems to be apostates.

"I believe the fact that [Thursday's attack] targeted a religious gathering is a sign that it was Islamic State-related," Stewart said. "Al-Qaeda specifically prohibits such attacks in their doctrine."

The battle for control between ISIS and al-Qaeda is one factor that makes Bangladesh especially vulnerable to attacks, experts say.

"Bangladesh is very relevant [as a target]," said Kamran Bokhari, a fellow at George Washington University's extremism program and a senior lecturer at the University of Ottawa. "It allows ISIS to say, 'Look, we're in South Asia.'"

"South Asia used to be al-Qaeda's turf," he added. "Al-Qaeda is now bitter that ISIS is encroaching on it."

Stewart said he's worried that both ISIS and al-Qaeda will try to surpass each other in violent attacks in Bangladesh.

"I'm really concerned we're going to see an escalation as al-Qaeda tries to respond in kind, to keep themselves relevant," he said. "At the same time, I think that Islamic State supporters are going to want to continue to kind of add on, you know, to their gains."

Up to this point, Stewart said, attacks in Bangladesh appear to have been carried out largely by local groups who may be acting on behalf of ISIS, but likely haven't had specialized training in bombs or other weaponry. That means the attacks could have been "far more deadly" than they were, he said.

"My largest concern is that we are going to see an infusion of more seasoned terrorists who will return to Bangladesh from Syria and Iraq," Stewart said. "That could ramp up the threat level considerably."

Exploiting 'local grievances'

Internal strife in Bangladesh, including long-established radical groups, make it fertile ground for ISIS, Stratfor said. 

"For the Islamic State, followers of these groups represent a vast pool of potential recruits," the firm said in its April report, while acknowledging some of those local groups could also become ISIS rivals. 

Tension between the Bangladeshi government and opposition critics — some of whom were arrested in 2015, according to Human Rights Watch — feeds into the interests of ISIS, Bokhari said.

"They are always scouting out and looking for areas where they can exploit local grievances and find allies and partners," he said. "When there is so much, you know, anti-government sentiment, that just works for ISIS."

Faiz Sobhan, research director in the foreign policy, security and countering violent extremism section of the Bangladesh Enterprise Institute, said he doesn't know definitively if ISIS has set its sights on the country, but there are reasons it might.

"Bangladesh is a predominantly Muslim majority country, with the third or fourth largest Muslim population in the world," Sobhan said in an email to CBC News. "A group like ISIS may be keen to test the waters and gauge what sort of reaction it obtains in such a country."

"Their global brand resonates with many extremist groups internationally and local groups in Bangladesh may wish to jump on the ISIS bandwagon to garner more attention," he said. "As ISIS begins to suffer more battlefield losses in their heartland [Iraq and Syria], they are increasingly focusing on setting up shop in new territories."

Nicole Ireland is an online and broadcast journalist for CBC News. Based in Toronto, she has lived and worked in Thunder Bay, Ont.; Iqaluit, Nunavut; and Beirut, Lebanon.

The government must respond with justice: FIDH

(Paris, 4 July 2016):  FIDH strongly condemns the terrorist attack that took place in a café in Dhaka’s Gulshan District on Friday 1 July, killing 20 people. FIDH expresses its sincere solidarity with the victims, the survivors and their families and with all those who have suffered the consequences of terrorist violence across the world.

FIDH reiterates that the Bangladeshi government must ensure the safety of all of its citizens and residents of Bangladesh, and must do so in accordance with human rights and international law. The authorities must develop effective strategies to counter the rise of religious militancy, and to promote respect and non-discrimination. The government must protect the right of free peaceful expression, stop denying the presence of global terrorist networks in Bangladesh, and refrain from extreme “security measures” in violation of due process rights. In addition, the authorities must thoroughly investigate the increasing violence allegedly committed by religious extremists in the country, notably the latest attack on 1 July, with an aim to bring the perpetrators to justice through impartial and transparent judicial processes.

Sadly, no such investigations nor judicial proceedings have taken place for the numerous attacks against activists and religious minorities in the past year. Instead, under the guise of “preventing the emergence of militancy” in Bangladesh, the Bangladesh security forces executed a wave of mass arrests two weeks ago that resulted in the detention of over 15,500 people in just seven days. However, only a small fraction of those arrested two weeks ago were suspected ‘militants’, and there were many reports of regular civilians with no priori arrest warrants being detained and forced to pay bribes in exchange for their release. In addition, members of the political opposition and human rights activists are currently in prison or constantly threatened for speaking out against violations or being critical of the regime. The government has also recently put forth increasingly restrictive laws in the name of national security that severely restrict fundamental freedoms and target human rights defenders and dissenting voices.

The fight against terrorism and security concerns cannot be used as a pretext for violating people’s most basic rights. The increasing violence in Bangladesh will not be addressed by such sweeping "security measures". The mass detention of people with no warrant and total disregard for due process will only exacerbate the climate of impunity felt throughout the country, which has led to the proliferation of violence and terrorist attacks.

FIDH therefore reiterates its call for independent and transparent investigations into the violent murders, extrajudicial killings, enforced disappearances, and terrorist threats that have and continue to take place in Bangladesh, regardless of the background and political or religious affiliation of the perpetrators. Addressing impunity, with respect for due process and fundamental rights, is the only way to counter the social and political violence and re-establish a sense of rule of law in Bangladesh.

- FIDH is an international human rights NGO federating 178 organizations from close to 120 countries. Since 1922, FIDH has been defending all civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights as set out in the Universal Declaration for Human Rights. FIDH's headquarters are in Paris and the organization has offices in Abidjan, Bamako, Brussels, Conakry, Geneva, The Hague, New-York, Pretoria and Tunis.

Dhaka and the Terrorist Threat

By Sumit Ganguly and Ali Riaz / Foreign Affairs

In the past 18 months, a series of attacks on secular bloggers, public intellectuals, Hindu and Buddhist priests, and a few foreigners has shaken Bangladesh. The Islamic State (ISIS) has claimed responsibility for much of the bloodshed. The group’s formal claim aside, it is not entirely clear whether it masterminded the attacks. What is clear, however, is that the government of Sheikh Hasina Wajed has continued to deny that the terrorist group has a presence in her country at all.  

After a strike on the Holey Artisan Bakery in Dhaka’s tony Gulshan neighborhood that led to 20 deaths last week, Hasina publicly condemned the “heinous attack” and promised to stamp out terrorism in the country. However, in her 12-minute speech, she still failed to acknowledge the presence of ISIS in Bangladesh. She did at least seem to grudgingly accept that the Gulshan attack represented an escalation from what she referred to as prior “stray killings.”

Hasina’s reticence is somewhat surprising. As the leader of the largest secular party in the country, she should have few qualms about taking an unequivocal stance against rising religious zealotry. (Since 2013, extremists have killed over 30 individuals; few, if any, of the perpetrators have been brought to justice.) Instead, Hasina has passed the blame onto the principal opposition party, the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) and one of its allies, the Islamist Jamaat-i-Islami. “The BNP–Jamaat nexus has been engaged in such secret and heinous murders in various forms to destabilize the country,” she asserted. Even foreign countries aren’t free of suspicion: “The British government should take more steps on the ground. Jamaat has a strong influence in East London.”

Such statements are part of a strategy that has successfully marginalized Jamaat-i-Islami and the BNP. Dhaka has relied on dubious legal measures as well. According to a Bangladeshi human rights organization, Odhikar, there have been as many as 202 disappearances of dissidents and opposition politicians since 2009. The Rapid Action Battalion, a government paramilitary force, critics claim, is responsible. The normally feisty press in Bangladesh is also under siege. As of earlier this year, the government had lodged as many as 79 cases against the editor of the prominent newspaper, The Daily Star. Its sister Bengali-language newspaper, Prothom Alo, faced as many as 25 defamation cases. Meanwhile, a widely criticized International Criminal Tribunal has sentenced as many as nine key Jamaat-i-Islami members to the death penalty. Four have already died.

At the same time, Hasina and her party, the Awami League, do not want to be seen as entirely hostile to Islamist sentiment for electoral reasons. (In 2008 parliamentary elections, the Jamaat-e-Islami secured 4.48 percent of votes. Other Islamist parties secured additional 1.79 percent.) And so, the ruling party has reportedly developed a warm relationship with the Hefazat-e-Islam, an obscurantist religious group that demanded the introduction of an anti-blasphemy law in 2013. In the end, the law did not pass. However, the ostensibly secular Awami League relegated itself to a passive spectator when the Hefazat-e-Islam promised bloodshed in April of this year after the Bangladesh Supreme Court considered a legal challenge to the role of Islam as the state religion of Bangladesh. (The court, in the end, dismissed the petition on a technicality.)
In the Awami League’s view, this fence-sitting has little to do with the ISIS-related violence of the past year and a half, which was in itself inconsequential. In fact, Hasina even partially exculpated a terrorist who attacked a blogger who had written about the prevalence of superstitions in the country. She argued that while freedom of expression was valuable, it should not amount to a license for hurting “religious sentiments.”
For the first time, ISIS claimed responsibility for taking hostages and for targeting a large group of foreigners. In the absence of a strong government response, however, terrorists have become bolder. ISIS, for example, initially targeted secular activists. Then, in October of last year, it moved on to attacking religious minorities including Bangladesh’s small Shia community. The move was an attempt to sow sectarian discord in a country that has long avoided denominational disharmony. 

The most recent attack was yet another escalation. For the first time, ISIS claimed responsibility for taking hostages and for targeting a large group of foreigners. More to the point, the group carried out its brazen strike in a diplomatic enclave of Dhaka that is known as a high-security area. To launch such a successful attack there, the terrorists would have had to make it through the multiple rings of security that envelop the capital city and particularly a posh neighborhood.

What is also striking is that, although ISIS promptly assumed responsibility for the killings, it did not make any demands on the government even as it detained over 30 people. Most likely, the militant group just wanted to demonstrate that it had the ability to strike with impunity.

It is not yet clear if the latest bloodshed will be a wake-up call for Dhaka. Despite Hasina’s apparent resolve to crack down on terrorism, her aversion to  acknowledging ISIS’ presence in the country was telling. The prior killings, no doubt, were atrocious. However, this attack leaves no doubt that ISIS’ reach is expanding. The terrorists involved in last week’s attack and in previous ones were upper middle class, urbanites. And with such pockets of support, ISIS is sure to be readying itself for the next plot.

The rest of the world should recognize the seriousness of the problem and work with Dhaka and civil society groups to counter the conditions that have spawned these terrorist groups. This may also be an opportune time to broaden intelligence cooperation with Bangladesh, to work with the regime to bolster the capabilities of its security forces, and to enable it to secure its very porous borders. Indeed, if anything, the attack highlighted the failure of the country’s intelligence and security services. The problem may have stemmed from those services’ politicization under this regime as well as earlier ones. Human rights and civil society organizations have repeatedly claimed that these entities have increasingly come under the thumb of the Awami League.

Perhaps this tragedy will convince the regime to refrain from further diminishing the autonomy of these bodies, improve their training, and enhance their professionalism. Even though the hostage crisis ended swiftly, the various units involved could not prevent the brutal murder of 20 people before the matter was brought to a close.

Finally, although it will be no easy task, Bangladesh will need to devote greater resources to making its borders stronger. The terrorists responsible for this incident were all from within Bangladesh. However, they have obvious links with transnational terror groups. In this context it is important to recall that one of the domestic groups, the Harkat-ul-Jihad-Islami was an original signatories of Osama bin Laden’s 1998 fatwa against the West.

The government and the international community’s continued cynicism could not only further destabilize this hitherto moderate Muslim nation, but also allow ISIS to expand its domain into the wider South Asian region.

Inspired by ISIS, Made in Bangladesh

Saroj Kumar Rath / YaleGlobal

NEW DELHI: For three years Bangladesh had witnessed sporadic killing of minorities, free- thinking bloggers and members of LGBT community amid signs of a growing ISIS presence. With the brutal murder of 22 diners, workers and police at the upscale Holey Artisan Bakery, Dhaka now joins Paris, Brussels, Orlando and Istanbul on the global map for terrorism. Distinguishing the Dhaka suspects from others is that they belong to the country’s western-educated elite including a senior member of the ruling party. The homegrown bunch made sure their crime got international airing, using the restaurant’s wifi to post ghastly images on the Islamic State website. As Bruce Riedel, a leading expert on terrorism, has noted, Bangladeshi terrorists have graduated from lone-wolf to wolf-pack attacks in extending the ISIS ideological footprint into South Asia.

The massacre carried out by a group of suicidal young men who had every reason to live not only raises questions about the appeal of extremist ideology on an unlikely cohort – it also exposes the hollowness of Bangladesh’s vaunted fight against terrorism, protecting the perpetrators while targeting political opponents. Sheikh Hasina government’s dismal failure in containing the spread of radical poison threatens to destabilize the country and the fragile region. 

Since Sheikh Hasina won the 2014 elections that were boycotted by the opposition and since the formation of Islamic State and Al Qaeda in the Indian Subcontinent, Bangladesh has witnessed the killings of 18 persons in daylight attacks, ISIS–al Qaeda style. The Bangladeshi authorities insisted that Jamaat-ul-Mujahideen Bangladesh, an organization formed in 1998, was behind the restaurant attack, and there is no denying that the militants were linked to JMB, but in the November issue of Dabiq, the Islamic State’s magazine, the group’s chief in Bangladesh, Abu Ibrahim al-Hanif,, had praised JMB for its intent and capacity to resist “the effect of both European colonization and Hindu cultural invasion.”

Extremist organizations in Bangladesh work in a fluid environment where cross-fertilization is the norm of the day.  Jamaat-e-Islami of Bangladesh has direct contact with Afghan Taliban, Gulbuddin Hekmatyar’s Hizb-e Islami and Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan. Hizb-ut-Tahrir is banned, but operates in the country. There is undeniable sprinkling of Islamic State militants and Ansarullah Bangla Team, an Al Qaeda affiliate, in Bangladesh. 

For its own reasons, Bangladesh has chosen to turn a blind eye to foreign inspirations. Last year when one Italian aid worker and a Japanese farmer were killed, ISIS was quick to claim responsibility. But a police investigation alleged that opposition leader Khalida Zia’s Bangladesh National Party workers orchestrated such attacks.

Independent secular bloggers, four in total, have been killed in similar fashion. The profile of other victims, comprised of non-Sunni Bangladeshi Muslims, Hindus, Christians, visiting foreigners and atheists confused local authorities. All the attacks were owned either by Islamic State or Al Qaeda, but the government refused to accept the presence of offshore militant organizations in the country, perhaps to reassure foreign investors. A nonchalant home minister, Asaduzzaman Khan, reiterated, “There’s no organizational existence of IS.” The prime minister preempted police by alleging the attacks were the handiwork of opposition parties.

The inception of International Crimes Tribunal by Sheikh Hasina’s Awami League Government in 2010 was used as a forum to settle political and personal scores on the nation’s founding tragedy – war crimes committed during the liberation war against Pakistan. Ongoing conflict between the two major political parties, the Bangladesh National Party, which considers itself custodian of Bangladeshi nationalism, and the Awami League, which regards itself as the sole guiding force of Bangladeshi liberation, has left the field open to ISIS and Al Qaeda to recruit militants.

As ISIS emerged in 2014, thousands of extremists from across the globe headed to Syria and Iraq. Authorities across the world, including those in Bangladesh, conveniently ignored the outflow of homegrown militants. Bangladeshi intelligence had alerted its government long ago that hundreds of their residents had traveled to Syria and Iraq to participate in Islamic State’s jihad to establish an Islamic Caliphate. High-ranking Bangladeshi intelligence officials noted that about 25 Bangladeshi militants have returned to the country from the Syrian and Iraqi theaters of war, and the same is true for India where security agencies have arrested three Indians who had participated in jihad in Syria. Indian cybersecurity experts have profiled ISIS propaganda in South Asia and tracked returnees from Syria and Iraq while also following the spread of ISIS ideology through the internet. Despite such monitoring, it was only a matter of time for militants driven out of ISIS strongholds in Syria and Iraq to return to their homelands. What ISIS lost in terms of territory in Syria and Iraq, it has regained in terms of influence.

The reverse flow of ISIS ideology, if not fighters, was quick in Europe and the United States in cities like Paris, Brussels, Istanbul and Orlando. In these cases, although de-radicalization methods were adopted by security agencies, local authorities tried to downplay the ISIS presence, fearing such admissions might be construed as a failure on the part of the incumbent government.

Since 2014, social media has indicated growing cooperation between ISIS and Bangladeshi extremist groups like Ansar ul Bangla Team, Jamaat-e-Islami Bangladesh, Jamaat-ul-Mujahideen Bangladesh and AQIS. A confabulated Dhaka Police discounted the possibility of the Islamic State’s presence in Bangladesh. In June, complicating the topography of extremism, Bangladesh police arrested 5,000 suspected militants from various groups including ISIS.

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi is helping Sheikh Hasina on many fronts. Both leaders get along well on many issues including containment of Islamic extremism. Although Modi and his ministers repeatedly disclaim the infiltration of ISIS in India, security agencies, especially cybersecurity wings, are known to constantly feed the government with real-time information about ISIS activities in India and neighboring countries.

It’s no secret that Indian radicals run a Twitter handle and other propaganda mechanisms for ISIS from Indian cities. One such recruiter is in Indian custody. Fearing the growing impact of ISIS, Modi himself initiated a session on de-radicalization at the annual meeting of state police chiefs at Rann of Katch in Gujarat. Nevertheless a lack of coordination among state and federal security agencies, as well as the inefficiency of state police and political rivalries, is taking a toll on India’s anti-terror policy. Reelection of Mamata Banerjee in West Bengal, accused of being soft on Islamic terrorism and Bangladeshi migrants, is a setback for Modi. India is like a landmine field, with extreme poverty, inequality in education and other opportunities, and a Muslim minority feeling marginalized. With the retreat of ISIS from Syria and Iraq, it’s more than likely that the ideology will soon reach Indian cities with a Dhaka-like attack waiting to unfold.

Closer scrutiny of the perpetrators’ profiles in Friday’s attack suggests that some children of the country’s elite are disillusioned with Bangladeshi politics and inspired by the Islamic State’s vision of an Islamic caliphate. Some have been silently radicalized by militant Islamists. Bangladeshi youth are exposed to real and imaginary pains of the Muslim world, and ISIS ideology carries appeal. Street struggles between the country’s leading political parties, hampering development of Bangladesh, has left educated, employable but impressionable youths disenchanted with the ability of political leaders to resolve problems. Prolonged political fights alienate the country’s elite, a sure way for the government to lose the country to the brutal ideologies of ISIS and its affiliates.

Saroj Kumar Rath, PhD, is assistant professor at the University of Delhi and an expert on security affairs in South Asia.

Look inside: Opinion from The Telegraph

The Holey Artisan Bakery siege places Bangladesh firmly on the global terror map and no amount of wistful denial on its part will change that fact. The Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham, which has claimed credit for the massacre, may not have been in actual control of the operation, as the Sheikh Hasina Wajed government insists. But no government in its right mind would deny its influence in transforming the face of terror, which seems to have happened in Bangladesh as well. The attack on foreigners, in a modus operandi that is distinctly different from the isolated knifings and bombings that Bangladesh has seen previously, places the Dhaka siege in the same league as the terror attacks in many world capitals.

Yet, the Bangladesh government seems unwilling to acknowledge that terror in Bangladesh has come of age. To continue to pin the blame on local groups may assuage its sense of guilt, but it does nothing to help its counter-terrorism effort, which has been plagued with innumerable shortcomings. For one, its ineffectuality, which is also the result of its world view. In spite of the growing incidence of attacks - on liberal intellectuals and members of minority groups - the government has not been able to move decisively against terror operatives. It has continued to blame the rival Bangladesh Nationalist Party and its affiliation with the radical Islamist Jamaat-e-Islami for all that has been plaguing the nation, and has ended up politicizing the counter-terror operation. The fact that the Hasina government finds it unnecessary to detach itself from the same logic while looking at the bakery siege shows that the same attitude might continue and thus stymie Bangladesh's fight against terror.

For India, it is essential that Bangladesh succeeds in this fight. It would find its peace threatened if, like Pakistan to its west, Bangladesh were to become a sanctuary for terror groups using its terrain to direct operations against India. Working in tandem after years, both India and Bangladesh have managed to act against some such groups. This cooperation can persist in countering groups that align themselves with either al Qaida or the ISIS, both transnational groups that require transnational operations to disable them. But Bangladesh has to realize that terror today is no longer the localized phenomenon it wishes it to be. And it is not just political rivals or a clutch of misguided religionists with a grudge against the government who are to blame for it.

The attack is the predictable result of unchecked violence

Jason Burke / The Guardian

For many observers of radical Islam, the first reaction to the attack on the diplomatic zone of Bangladesh’s capital, Dhaka [last Friday] is that it was utterly predictable.

Over the past year, Bangladesh – an overwhelmingly Muslim country of 150 million people – has seen growing violence against both foreigners and locals deemed to be enemies of extremist Islam: secular bloggers, outspoken critics of fundamentalism, members of religious minorities such as Hindus and Christians, police officers and others.

Until now, the violence has taken the form of largely low-tech attacks involving small groups of militants or even individuals armed with knives or small arms.

Friday’s attack, however, was an operation of a much greater magnitude. Early reports suggest at least five gunmen, armed with sufficient automatic weapons and grenades to repel at least one assault by local police.

Western intelligence have been nervous about a major operation for at least 18 months. Indications of a complex plan to attack a diplomatic ball last year prompted much alarm – and pressure from western capitals on Dhaka to move effectively against the militant networks existing in the unstable south Asian nation.

This did not happen. The Awami League government of Hasina Sheikh has instead looked to extract political advantage from the situation, either blaming what is left of the political opposition in Bangladesh, or denying outright that militant networks linked to organisations such as Islamic State or al-Qaida even existed in the country, despite their claims of responsibility for successive killings.

Instead of cracking down on the hardline groups which encouraged, or even sponsored, the attacks on local bloggers and minorities, the government effectively made concessions to the conservatives, with the prime minister implying those who had insulted religious sensibilities were in part responsible for their fate. Bloggers seeking police protection were ignored.

So who might be responsible for this attack? Late on Friday, Islamic State claimed the attack through its affiliated Amaq news agency, but the group’s involvement could not be confirmed. Both Isis and al-Qaida have been targeting Bangladesh as an area of potential expansion. Indeed, the rivalry between the two is key. Isis has mentioned Bangladesh frequently in its propaganda, while al-Qaida has devoted entire videos to the country, calling on Muslims in the country to rise up against their “apostate” rulers.

But Bangladesh is far from the central zone of activity of Isis in the Middle East, and the organisation has never had a strong presence in south Asia. Al-Qaida, in contrast, was founded in Pakistan in 1988 and has been a permanent presence in the region since 1996. It sees the region as central to its strategy and survival.

In 2014, al-Qaida’s leader, Ayman al-Zawahiri, announced the formation of a new affiliate, al-Qaida in South Asia (Aqisa), and said its zone of operations stretched from Afghanistan to Bangladesh. So far, Aqisa has failed to make its mark but it is entirely possible that the attack in Dhaka is its latest attempt to do so.

Can Bangladesh respond? There has been significant US and UK involvement with security services in Bangladesh aimed at reinforcing capabilities. The controversial Rapid Action Battalion (RAB) has been the recipient of some aid – and has been accused of systematic human rights abuses.

The violence in Bangladesh over recent years has attracted some interest from the press but very little from policymakers around the world. Bangladesh, though in a key pivotal position between the Asia Pacific region and South Asia, has not been a priority in Washington, London or elsewhere. There has been some focus on the economy – which remains relatively healthy – but few have paid much attention to the increasingly restricted space in the troubled country for political dissent, pluralism or traditional moderate strands of observance.

This attack, however it ends, will make it much more difficult for both authorities in Dhaka and international observers to ignore the threat of extremist Islam in one of the biggest Muslim majority countries in the world.

How Will Bangladesh Respond to the Attack?

By Samanth Subramanian / The New Yorker

On Friday [July 1] evening, when gunmen burst into the Holey Artisan Bakery, in Dhaka, the restaurant was quiet. Few of its regular Muslim customers were dining out, having just broken their Ramadan fasts at home, so the tables were occupied largely by expatriates: a group of Italians out for dinner, another cluster of Japanese, Sri Lankans, and Indians. This was a crowd typical of Gulshan, a neighborhood of diplomats and corporate executives, which, with its tranquil streets and watercolor lake views, feels a long way from the traffic-choked bedlam elsewhere in Dhaka.

Storming the Holey Artisan Bakery was, in other words, a result of diligent homework. It wasn’t until the next morning, ten hours later, that Bangladesh Army commandos broke the siege, killing six attackers and arresting a seventh. Most of the twenty slain victims were foreigners; one, a sophomore at Emory University, was an American of Bangladeshi origin. Thirteen people, patrons as well as staff, survived. Through the long, terrible night, one eyewitness said, the attackers tested the hostages, torturing or murdering them if they couldn’t recite verses from the Koran. “We will not kill Bengalis,” one of the gunmen said, according to the Times. “We will only kill foreigners.”

The attack, which was subsequently claimed by the Islamic State, through its Amaq information agency, provides a tragically clarifying moment in Bangladesh’s recent history of violence. Since 2013, at least forty people across the country have been killed in separate attacks—on the streets or in their homes, many sliced to death with machetes. Among the first victims were several secular bloggers, including an American, Avijit Roy, who was killed in February, 2015; foreigners, publishers, minority Hindus and Christians, and gay-rights activists have also been murdered.

This spree of violence has punctured the self-constructed reputation of the Awami League, the ruling party, as the sole guardian of the secular fiber of Sunni-majority Bangladesh. In its successful election campaigns of 2008 and 2014, the Awami League had promised to be tough on terror, and to prosecute those who had collaborated with Pakistani Islamists to impede Bangladesh’s war of liberation, in 1971. The tensions of the war have lurked beneath the surface of the country’s politics ever since, boiling over in 2013, when students and bloggers organized massive protests, calling for the harshest possible sentences for convicted war criminals. But shortly thereafter, when assassins began to kill bloggers, often in public and in open daylight, the government responded weakly. Once, Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina even suggested that the murdered writers ought to have kept their controversial opinions on Islam to themselves.

Over the past three years, Bangladesh has been unable to ascertain the force behind these executions. Some of the killings, including Roy’s, were claimed by Ansarullah Bangla Team, a local group of militants that spoke largely through its Twitter handle; a police official described Ansarullah as an Al Qaeda affiliate, but in a tweet Ansarullah bragged that Roy had been killed to avenge the United States’ actions againstISIS. Yet the government has denied the presence of either Al Qaeda or ISIS on Bangladeshi soil; one of its ministers, speaking to me late last year, was more eager to blame his party’s primary political opposition, the Bangladesh National Party, and the B.N.P.’s proscribed Islamist ally, the Jamaat-e-Islami. Last month, under pressure to act, the government arrested more than eleven thousand people, including a hundred and forty-five suspected Islamic militants; police officials said that they were cracking down on every form of crime, from theft to assault, but the B.N.P. complained that the raids were a cover to detain its workers. By way of further complication, it wasn’t uncommon to hear the paranoid theory that the government’s security agencies had carried out some of the murders, to give itself an excuse to turn Bangladesh into more of a police state.

Friday’s attack on the Holey Artisan Bakery, however, leaves little room for doubt about the growing influence of ISIS in the country, Amarnath Amarasingam, a fellow at George Washington University’s Program on Extremism, told me. “The most important thing here is that ISIS has taken credit, and they don’t take credit for things they didn’t do,” he said. “Now, this doesn’t mean Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi is calling these guys in Dhaka and telling them what to do. It doesn’t mean these fighters were in direct contact with the top leadership or funded by them. What you can say is that linkages exist.” Even if the discontents are local, the allegiance is now global.

On Saturday, Amarasingam tweeted out photos of five of the attackers, which were first published on ISIS media channels. “Here they are again with names . . . and, ugh, smiling faces,” he wrote. “Definitely shows some serious pre-planning.” The photos show young men with starter goatees, distinctly South Asian in appearance, wearing black tunics and red-and-white kaffiyehs. They stand in front of the ISIS banner and hold automatic weapons at the same angle, pointed just to the left of their feet, their forefingers resting loosely on the trigger guards. In captions, we learn their given kunyas, or Arabic noms de guerre. They are squinting into the light, and their smiles are shockingly sunny, as if they were posing for yearbook photos.

The fact that these photos were taken, to be released after the siege ended, reveals an element of meticulous organization. Some of the people who were killed in the Holey Artisan Bakery were cut up with cleavers or machetes, and although this was not necessarily a signature of ISIS operations, Amarasingam said, “these attacks sometimes do have a sort of weird local flavor.” The gunmen had clearly planned to take photos of the carnage, mid-siege, and transmit them for publication on ISIS channels, but, when they snatched smartphones from survivors for this purpose, the 3G signal proved flimsy, so the restaurant staff was ordered to switch on the Wi-Fi network. One of the gunmen, survivors recalled, had also remembered to pack a laptop.

Still, despite signs that the attacks were the handiwork of ISIS sympathizers, Asaduzzaman Khan, Bangladesh’s home minister, refused afterward to acknowledge that the government is dealing with serious terrorism, rather than an extraordinarily violent brand of party politics. On Sunday, he said that the gunmen were members of yet another homegrown, long-banned Islamic militia, the Jamaat-ul-Mujahideen Bangladesh, not supporters of ISIS. Asked why the young men, who had gone to an élite school in Dhaka, would choose to become militants, Khan replied, “It has become a fashion.”

Such denials have begun to sound both rote and specious. Khan may be correct in implying that the disaffection driving these men to violence flows from the frictions and problems of Bangladeshi society, rather than the appeal of a global caliphate. But, given the sort of spectacular horror that Dhaka has just witnessed, it appears that ISIS has found firm traction within a segment of the populace. To forestall further acts of terror, Bangladesh’s government will have to face up to that grim new reality.

Samanth Subramanian is a New Delhi-based journalist and the author of ”This Divided Island: Stories from the Sri Lankan War.”

Terrorist attack in Dhaka should surprise no one

By Ishaan Tharoor, July 1 / The Washington Post

The details remain murky [on Friday evening in Washington]. On Friday night, assailants assaulted a restaurant in an upscale neighborhood in Dhaka, Bangladesh's teeming capital. They fired weapons and hurled grenades. Initial reports suggest that six to eight gunmen were inside the establishment, detaining about 20 hostages. At least one police officer was slain during the standoff with the militants.

Officers of the Rapid Action Battalion, an elite paramilitary police unit, filled the streets of Gulshan, a leafy district that's home to diplomats as well as the country's elite. The restaurant under siege is a bakery in the daytime and a Spanish eatery at night.

A media group online that's linked to the Islamic State took credit for the attack, according to the SITE Intelligence Group, which monitors jihadist activity. It's not clear, though, that the organization has a genuine operational presence in the country.

Speculation had immediately fallen on extremist groups believed to be operating in Bangladesh, including outfits affiliated both with al-Qaeda's South Asian wing and the Islamic State. In the past two years, horrific attacks by self-declared Islamists have targeted Hindus, intellectuals, secularist writers and bloggers.

According to one count, the Islamic State has claimed responsibility for more attacks in Bangladesh through its social media accounts than in Pakistan or Afghanistan. The extremist organization had called on its fighters and proxies to launch such strikes on soft targets during the holy month of Ramadan.

The government, led by Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, has struggled to come to grips with the issue. It has rebuffed any suggestion that the Islamic State has a foothold in the country. And it has sought to deflect blame for its perceived mishandling of the security crisis.

Last month, a senior minister chose to pin the escalation in violence on a vague Israeli conspiracy rather than domestic problems. In police crackdowns, authorities have rounded up some 12,000 people, but most of those detained have been petty criminals and supporters of opposition parties, the Associated Press reported.

Counterterrorism experts say the Hasina government has expended more energy consolidating its position and suppressing its opponents than tackling the spread of Islamist violence in the country. A recent report from the International Crisis Group argued that a skewed judicial system and the heavy-handed rule of Hasina's ruling Awami League party, which is traditionally secular and center-left, was laying the foundation for further militant violence and unrest.

"There is no time to lose," the report concluded. "If mainstream dissent remains closed, more and more government opponents may come to view violence and violent groups as their only recourse."

The prime minister "has blamed much of the country’s extremist violence on the political opposition, namely the Jamaat-e-Islaami (JI) and the Bangladesh National Party," writes Michael Kugelman, South Asia expert at the Woodrow Wilson Center. ". ... Still, to seemingly rule out that groups other than Dhaka’s chief political foes are perpetrating Bangladesh’s intensifying extremist violence is naïve at best, and dangerous at worst."

WorldViews had more last month:

In the shadow of creeping extremism, the ruling government of Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina has been criticized for its growing authoritarian style.

Controversial moves to prosecute and execute war criminals from the country's bloody struggle for independence in 1971 pushed Islamist factions deeper underground and have perhaps provoked a violent counter-response. Meanwhile, other dissidents and journalists have found themselves subject to state censure and intimidation.

The political environment, in other words, has left Bangladesh deeply susceptible to such havoc. "By merely shrugging off Bangladesh’s alarming levels of extremist violence, Dhaka puts the country in greater peril," writes Kugelman. "And it strengthens the forces that wish to undermine Bangladesh’s founding identity as a pluralistic, secular state."

Bangladesh, as a nation, exists on the periphery of the American imagination. Few in the United States would probably know it has one of the world's largest Muslim populations, larger than that of any country in the Middle East. But in the wake of the Istanbul terrorist attack, attention has fallen on the chosen tactics of the Islamic State and its proxies. A coordinated strike on Gulshan, the epicenter of wealth and elite power in Dhaka, has all the hallmarks of the terrorist organization's strategy.

House of Commons debate on Bangladesh

From Hansard report of the UK House of Commons debate; June 28, 2016:

Simon Danczuk (Rochdale) (Ind)

I beg to move,
That this House has considered the current situation in Bangladesh.
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Alan, and I thank the Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office, the right hon. Member for East Devon (Mr Swire), for attending this very important debate.
Let me briefly set out why we are having this debate and explain what I hope to cover in the time available to me. The current situation in Bangladesh has some relationship to the war for independence in 1971, but it is also very much the result of the seriously flawed general election on 5 January 2014. That election was flawed because the Awami League Government were manipulating the results. They refused to consider the creation of a caretaker Government and they put obstacles in the way of the opposition parties; indeed, they made it impossible for the opposition to take part satisfactorily. That is why the opposition rightly and understandably boycotted that election. As we now creep towards the next general election, we see that the same Awami League Government have become increasingly concerned that they will not win it through legitimate means.
In debating the current situation in Bangladesh, I will talk about, first, the consequences of that flawed general election; secondly, what has been happening recently, particularly some of the atrocities that have taken place; thirdly, what we should anticipate happening next in Bangladesh; fourthly, why all this is relevant to the United Kingdom; and finally, what I hope the Government might consider doing in the near future.
There is irrefutable evidence that democracy has now broken down in Bangladesh. I was in the country just a few weeks ago and I spoke with trustworthy non-governmental organisations. I learned that ballot boxes were now being stuffed with ballot papers for the ruling party in advance of local elections taking place; that opposition candidates were not appearing on the ballot paper when they should have been; that opposition candidates were being “persuaded” not to stand or campaign; and that there are also concerns about the politicisation of the electoral commission in Bangladesh. Added to those issues is the restraint on freedom of expression and the pressure being put on the free press.

Dr Rupa Huq (Ealing Central and Acton) (Lab)

The hon. Gentleman is making a very powerful speech, even if it has only just begun.

4.18 pm

Sitting suspended for a Division in the House.

4.30 pm

On resuming—

Dr Huq

As I was saying before we were so rudely interrupted, is my hon. Friend aware of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association and the fact that it is having its annual conference in September, with 200-plus nations gathering in Dhaka, Bangladesh? Can the Minister do anything to assure UK parliamentarians who may wish ​to attend that conference? If we want to meet secular or atheistic bloggers, can we have some assurances on freedom of association? I am not too sure about that, in light of the terrible recent murders that have shocked the world. The fact that my hon. Friend was talking about the opposition and what may happen next reminded me of that point, which I wanted to make him aware of.

Simon Danczuk

I am aware of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association conference that will take place in Bangladesh. It is a good forum for British parliamentarians and other parliamentarians from across the Commonwealth. It will allow them to be in Bangladesh and express some of the same concerns as my hon. Friend. The point I was making relates in particular to the press. The murder, torture and harassment of journalists is well known. Many are fleeing to Britain and seeking asylum here because of the threats and attacks.

John Howell (Henley) (Con)

I have been to Bangladesh on a number of occasions and once during an election period, and they have always been very violent affairs. What is it about this election that makes it different from those earlier elections?

Simon Danczuk

I completely agree that politics runs passionately high in the country, but it is getting unbearable. Some of the points that I will touch on show that things are moving towards a serious situation of civil unrest, and that needs to be addressed. Tensions are perhaps more heightened than when the hon. Gentleman was in the country.
I met Oli Ullah Numan, who came to the UK for the very reasons I described. He was a journalist who wrote disparagingly about the current Government. He soon started feeling that his life was under threat. Talking to him in Rochdale, I could see the stress and fear that his experience had caused him. Most upsetting for him was not that he was now separated from his wife and children, but that he feared for their lives because they remained in the country. Reporters Without Borders rates Bangladesh at 144th out of 180 countries on its world press freedom index and talks about how journalists there have to be very careful about criticising the Government or religion.
If all that was not bad enough, on 4 May, the Bangladesh Government announced the setting up of a media monitoring centre. They are also taking steps to bring social media under similar forms of regulation to those for print and television. Indeed, the draft Digital Security Act provides for sentences of life imprisonment for anyone spreading negative propaganda about the 1971 war of independence or Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina’s father. The Act also provides for the sentencing of anybody who deliberately defames someone or hurts their religious sentiment via digital media to two years in prison, replicating existing provisions in law. Another draft law, the Liberation War Denial Crimes Act, makes similar provisions.
All that is restricting a free press and attempting to quash any criticism of the Government. In addition, we are now seeing attacks on secular bloggers. In 2015, four were murdered: a gentleman called Roy in February, Rahman Babu in March, Bijoy Das in May and Chakrabarti in August. While al-Qaeda takes responsibility for some of the attacks, a group called Ansarullah Bangla Team also takes some responsibility. It has published a hit list that includes UK-based bloggers. ​On 6 April, a law student and blogger was murdered by a group linked to al-Qaeda. The Awami League Home Office Minister’s response was simply to tell bloggers to be careful what they wrote about. On 23 April, a university professor was hacked to death and Daesh claimed responsibility. On 25 April, two people were hacked to death, including the editor of a lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender magazine, and again an al-Qaeda affiliate took responsibility. Then, on 30 April, a Hindu man was murdered and Daesh claimed responsibility. Those from the tiny Shi’a Muslim minority have also become prominent targets, with processions and their mosques facing attack. Last month, an elderly Buddhist monk was hacked to death. Religious minorities, writers, bloggers and publishers have continued to be attacked and murdered, and that has had a chilling effect on freedom of expression in Bangladesh.
The breakdown in law and order continues with the gross violation of human rights. Amnesty International regularly reports on what it calls enforced disappearances, and it clearly holds the security forces responsible. It talks of officers in plain clothes arresting dozens of people but then denying any knowledge of their whereabouts. A survey of national newspapers conducted by the human rights organisation, Ain o Salish Kendra, indicated the enforced disappearance of at least 43 individuals, including two women, between January and September 2015. Of the 43, six were later found dead, four were released after their abduction and five were found in police custody. The fate and whereabouts of the other 28 is unknown. Human Rights Watch has also criticised the authorities’ use of excessive force, which includes the extra-judicial killings of opposition supporters. In particular, the Rapid Action Battalion is singled out as being involved in the extra-judicial killings and disappearances. Mass arrests are taking place, with experts stating that they are aimed not so much at Islamic extremists or terrorists but more at political opponents.
If all that were not bad enough, the justice system is seen as biased and is being used to silence the Government’s political opponents, not least through what is called the International Crimes Tribunal. The tribunal has been condemned by the United Nations because it does not meet international standards. It is clearly politicised and is being used not to serve justice for crimes against humanity during the 1971 war of independence but to provide political results. That is perhaps best illustrated by the fact that both Jamaat-e-Islami and Bangladesh National party leaders have faced the death penalty following flawed trials at the tribunal.
Besides that, allegations are regularly made by the current Government against political opponents, tying them down in legal battles and constraining them through threats of police action and prison. As we steadily move towards the next general election in Bangladesh, the Government appear to be making more allegations, particularly against those political opponents who are particularly popular. Attempts are being made to use the judicial process to thwart the electoral chances of opponents such as Tarique Rahman and Khaleda Zia. It is as though the Awami League is trying to choose its opponents for the next general election. Indeed, the next general election could well be more corrupt and fraudulent than the last. We are observing Bangladesh collapse into chaos. As a consequence, we are also ​seeing a rise in Islamist extremism. The erosion of civic space, the demolition of democracy and the reduction of human rights are all causing a void that is being filled by fundamentalists.
Unhelpfully, the Bangladesh Government often deny that Daesh has a presence in the country and have criticised foreign intelligence agencies and independent commentators who have suggested otherwise. Such a “head in the sand” mentality helps nobody, but neither does the mentality of Bangladesh’s high commissioner to Britain, who recently went on the BBC Radio 4 “Today” programme and claimed, to the astonishment and disbelief of the presenter and audience, that some of the extremist murders are being committed by the Bangladesh Nationalist party. That can be bettered only by Bangladesh’s Minister of Home Affairs, who recently blamed Israel for some of the attacks. Let me be clear: it helps nobody to deny that there is a problem with extremism in Bangladesh, but it is deeply corrosive and haunting to play party politics with Islamist terrorism, as the high commissioner did.
Britain and Bangladesh have very strong ties. We trade heavily with each other. We rely heavily on the Bangladesh garment industry. We have the largest Bangladeshi diaspora in Europe. We enjoy the cultural experience that Bangladeshis bring to Britain—indeed, we rely heavily on Bangladeshi chefs to cook our national dish, chicken tikka masala. Bangladesh relies on aid from Britain, and on the remittances that are still being sent home. We share space and understanding within that great institution, the Commonwealth. I have grave concerns for the people of Bangladesh. The problems seem to be escalating. Human rights abuses are increasing dramatically. State violence is becoming extreme. I am worried that the country is steadily slipping towards civil unrest and, potentially, civil war, which is why I suggest that our Government take further action.
What more does the Minister think can be done? I accept that the Foreign Office has recently designated Bangladesh a human rights priority country, but more pressure needs to be applied. What more can the British Government do to press Sheikh Hasina’s regime to start holding free and fair elections and to move towards a free and fair general election? Do the Government believe that some of our aid budget for Bangladesh is going into institutions, such as the Election Commission Bangladesh, that are clearly politicised and favour one party over another? If so, what should be done? Does the Minister have any concerns that weapons or equipment from the UK may be used by the security forces to suppress political activists, restrain political liberty and reduce freedom of expression? Does the Minister agree that it is now appropriate to consider sanctions against Bangladesh? Perhaps we should at least refuse entry to the UK for those in Bangladesh who are clearly responsible for some of the abuses we are discussing.
I know that there will always remain a very strong bond between Britain and Bangladesh. Indeed, our relationship allows us to be critical friends. The time has now come for the British Government to be a little more critical and a little less friendly to the current Bangladesh regime.

Sir Alan Meale (in the Chair)

I shall call any other Members who wish to participate, but I should indicate to them that there are only around three to four minutes ​before I call the Minister to respond to the mover of the motion, who will wind up the debate at the end. If more than one Member wishes to speak, they should understand that if they are to be fair, there is limited time for them to make a representation. I call Rupa Huq.

4.43 pm

Dr Rupa Huq (Ealing Central and Acton) (Lab)

Sir Alan, it was my intention only to make an intervention about the bloggers and the fact that the Charter of the Commonwealth, by which the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association abides, ensures the fundamental freedom of association. I am particularly interested to hear from the Minister whether Her Majesty’s Government are making representations to the Government in Bangladesh to ensure that fundamental right when the conference takes place in September.
As you have given me the floor, Sir Alan, I would like to echo some of the comments made by my hon. Friend the Member for Rochdale (Simon Danczuk) about the Bangladeshi diaspora. I am one of three Members of Parliament of Bangladeshi origin in this House. My hon. Friend painted a rather depressing portrait. I believe it was George Harrison who wrote a song about Bangladesh being a terrible mess. Some of the sentiments expressed by my hon. Friend seem to give weight to that opinion, although it was expressed only in popular song. It is a country that has been monitored on many fronts: democracy, human rights and freedom of association. I am looking forward to hearing the Minister’s speech.

Sir Alan Meale (in the Chair)

Of course the hon. Lady is a senior politician in this place and she knows the rules. Debates in Westminster Hall operate under strict timetables. The mover of the motion has indicated that he wants the Minister to reply to the questions he posed. If any time is left, it can be granted to other Members, but we now have to move on because we are approaching the witching hour, when the Minister has to be called.

4.45 pm

The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Mr Hugo Swire)

I congratulate the hon. Member for Rochdale (Simon Danczuk) on securing this important debate and commend the consistent commitment he has shown to Bangladesh, both as a member of the all-party group on Bangladesh and as an MP representing British nationals of Bangladeshi heritage. I thank the hon. Member for Ealing Central and Acton (Dr Huq) for her contribution. As the Minister with responsibility for bilateral relations with Bangladesh and for the Commonwealth, I will try to address as many of the points raised as I can in the time available.
As the hon. Member for Rochdale said, the relationship between the UK and Bangladesh is strong. That relationship is enhanced, and British society as a whole is enriched, by the diaspora community. As a close friend of Bangladesh and fellow members of the Commonwealth, we care deeply about what happens there, both now and in future. We want Bangladesh to develop into an economically ​successful country that maintains its Bengali tradition of respect and tolerance for people of all faiths and backgrounds.
In June last year, the House debated Bangladesh against a backdrop of political unrest, the brutal murders of bloggers, and allegations of extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearances. Since then, there have been more attacks against minority groups and those who hold views counter to traditional values and beliefs. Responsibility for many of the attacks has been claimed by Daesh, or by groups affiliated to Al-Qaeda in the Indian Subcontinent. As has been pointed out, there has also been pressure on opposition parties, including the Bangladesh Nationalist party, and on dissenting voices in the media and civil society.
Peaceful, credible elections are the true mark of a mature functioning democracy, and all political parties share a responsibility for delivering them. The UK will continue to engage constructively with all parties in Bangladesh, and with international partners, to work towards that end. It is generally recognised that a shrinking of space for democratic challenge and debate can push some towards extremist alternatives. I am deeply concerned that the recent appalling spate of murders is becoming an all-too-common occurrence. The Prime Minister discussed our concerns with the Prime Minister of Bangladesh, Sheikh Hasina, on 27 May in Tokyo, highlighting the fact that extremist attacks risk undermining stability in Bangladesh. I also raised those concerns with the Bangladeshi high commissioner on 24 May, and our high commissioner in Dhaka regularly discusses these issues in meetings with the Bangladeshi Government.
I welcome the commitment by the Government of Bangladesh to bring those responsible for recent extremist attacks to justice. We have also made it clear, in public and in private, that justice must be done in a manner that fully respects the international human rights standards that Bangladesh has signed up to and which, as a member of both the Commonwealth and the UN Human Rights Council, it has pledged to uphold.
Mass arrests and suspicious “crossfire” deaths at the hands of the police undermine confidence in the judicial system. Investigations must be conducted transparently and impartially, irrespective of the identity of the victim or the alleged perpetrator. Anyone arrested should be treated in full accordance with due process and Bangladeshi law. It is also important to explore the root causes of the attacks involving international links.
We urge Bangladesh, as a vibrant, modern and rapidly growing democracy, to protect and promote freedom of expression as one of its core values. Prime Minister Hasina has repeatedly extolled the secular, tolerant nature of Bangladesh. Her Government must be unequivocal about protecting the rights of all citizens, including those who express different views or lead different lifestyles. The victims themselves should not be blamed.
As recent events in the United Kingdom, France, the US and elsewhere sadly show, Bangladesh is not alone in having to face the scourge of extremist violence. All countries must stand together to combat extremism and terrorism. This is not a challenge to be faced in isolation. We can and will do more to engage with the Government of Bangladesh on areas of shared concern, such as counter-terrorism, counter-extremism and the promotion of human rights for all. At the same time, our development ​programme—still one of our largest—continues to address some of the root causes, including poverty and economic marginalisation.
The threat of terrorism and extremism affects us all. It should not be faced alone, and it is incumbent on us all to work together to promote tolerance and acceptance. The protection of human rights is a core value of the UK and of the Commonwealth. The hon. Member for Ealing Central and Acton (Dr Huq) asked about the CPA meeting later in the year in Bangladesh, and I urge the new secretary-general of the Commonwealth, Baroness Scotland, to visit Bangladesh as soon as she can in order to assess the situation for herself. We will continue to encourage the Prime Minister, Sheikh Hasina, to deliver on her commitments to tackle terrorism, to protect human rights and to do so in a way that is compliant with the rule of law and due process, which is in both our interests. Bangladesh has a long-term vision to be a peaceful, prosperous and developed nation; the UK shares that aspiration and wants to be a friend of a vibrant, stable and economically successful Bangladesh.
I again thank the hon. Member for Rochdale for the opportunity to debate the issues, and I thank all other hon. Members for their contributions.

4.53 pm

Simon Danczuk (Rochdale) (Ind)

I thank hon. Members for their contributions and interventions, and I thank the Minister for his response to the issues that I have raised. Without doubt, we all want to see solutions to the problems that are obviously occurring in Bangladesh, and I am pleased to hear that the Prime Minister spoke to Sheikh Hasina as recently as last month.
I still have some concerns. We are fast approaching CHOGM, the Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting, which will be held in London in a year or two. I hope that more progress will be made in Bangladesh before we get to that stage. Finally, we are left with three questions that the Minister still needs to answer: first, is any British aid being used in a partisan way; secondly, is there use of any weapons or equipment to suppress political opposition; and, thirdly, at what stage would Britain consider sanctions against Bangladesh, if the situation does not improve?

Sir Alan Meale (in the Chair)

May I suggest to the hon. Gentleman, when he goes over his deliberations in Hansard tomorrow, that he might take the view expressed by Ms Huq and contact the CPA to warn it that this matter came up in the course of his debate? He could ask the CPA to ensure that all precautions are taken in the event of the conference taking place.
Question put and agreed to.