Strategically Speaking
Revisiting August 21
It's appalling that a matter of the highest magnitude as the attack on the AL public meeting on August 21, 2004, targeting its highest leadership, is yet to be resolved to the satisfaction of all concerned -- the victims, the people, and the state. We have been hearing of various enquiries and investigations being conducted over the last there years. But we are yet to get any idea of the major findings of these investigations. Recent police statements suggest that the investigations are all but completed and charges would be framed soon. That being the case, would it not help matters, apart from assuaging the concern of the people, if we were told of the important aspects of the case. It needs to be done because there are many questions that, regrettably, still remain unanswered. This is a matter that has far reaching implications for the country's security.
Admittedly, it may not always be possible for the government to reveal all the information or intelligence gathered in the process of investigation, both for the sake of future probe in this matter as well as others related to the issue, and also for the sake of national security. But it is essential that the public be made aware of the progress of the case and the direction the agencies are heading towards.
I am aware of at least one inquiry commission, the one-man Justice Muhammed Joynal Abedin Commission, which had long since submitted its report to the government, in October 2004. While we have not had the benefit of the committee's important conclusions, what is perhaps more worrisome is the contradictory statements from higher echelons of the administration, including the investigating agencies, giving different views of the case which have compounded confusions even more.
Since August 21, 2004, there have been several terrorist attacks in Bangladesh that were motivated by religious extremism. The most serious of which was on August 17, 2005. Through these bombings the religious radicals made their formal appearance, although there was very little doubt about the religious or ideological orientation of the perpetrators of most of the bombings in the country since the Udichi incident of 1999. The leadership of the JMB, perpetrators of the August 17th bombings as well as some of the previous ones too, have been sent to the gallows, but we have not yet gone deep into the group's operation, sponsors, and motivators.
But the incident of August 21 remains a mystery despite the statement of the police chief. We compliment the IGP for being so candid and definitively clear about the complicity of Mufti Hannan and HUJI (B) in organizing and conducting the August 21 attack. It is for the first time in three years that we have heard such conclusive statements about the perpetrators of the August 21 attack. With several simultaneous enquiries being conducted at the same time, one would not be wrong in suggesting, given the statements in the press on August 21 on the matter, that the police chief's assured reflection (to a private TV channel on August 21) on Hannan being the main person behind the attack is a remarkable revelation.
But what he added after that is equally interesting. It throws a new insight on the operational mechanism of terrorists. He has suggested that Mufti Hannan might have obtained the help of other terror groups to conduct the attack. While outsourcing jobs is not new, this is the first time that one has heard of one terrorist group outsourcing its tasks to another. So what should one make of the "George Mia" episode? And what conclusions should people draw from whatever little that was leaked from Justice Abedin's enquiry report regarding involvement of a foreign intelligence agency? All one can say by way of comment on the published interrogation report of Mufti Hannan is that there are enough holes in the statement to stitch a fairly large fishing net with.
I started by calling the failure to come to a conclusive finding regarding August 21 attack appalling, not because it has remained unresolved, but because of the manner in which the case was handled. The soft peddling on the matter was evident, and there was red herring deliberately thrown to derail the investigations. What we have today are contradictory and confusing statements from the relevant agencies dealing with the case. Nothing can be more damaging than bringing partisan influence to bear on the investigating agencies of any case, not to speak of a case like the August 21 bombing that, had it succeeded in its mission, would have created a severe political and, consequently, a security crisis for us. Therefore, the investigating agencies must go deep into the facts revealed, not only by the arrested militants, particularly Mufti Hannan, but also by the Joynal Commission report.
Of interest to us is what the press has termed the biggest revelation of the Joynal Commission report. The justice has found links to "foreign enemies apart from local ones." We are not aware of the facts that helped him reach such a conclusion, but this should not be brushed aside as merely speculative since the possibility of involvement of a terrorist organisation from across the border has also been in the press reports. If a "foreign enemy" could conduct such an attack in the heart of the capital, there must have been local collaborators to help them. While not going into the cost benefit analysis or the motive of an external terrorist group in undertaking such a venture, we should consider such a possibility and discard or accept it through the process of elimination. What we ought to consider is that it is not possible for the group to have infiltrated, carried out the task and escaped, without local help. Who is that local abettor? Is there more than one? This must be gone deep into.
I am inclined to believe that there are grounds to see the two incidents -- August 17 and 21 -- as being compelled by different motives. The former was entirely ideologically moored, while political motives drove the attack against Sheikh Hasina and her senior party leaders. While it is not my intention to throw a spanner in the works of the intelligence agencies, the description by Mufti Hannan, of his preparation and planning for the attack and the method of conduct, throws up many questions to which the agencies no doubt will seek answers.
There is yet another equally important matter that we would want answered -- that of the local sponsors of the religious militants as well as their nexus with political parties. Several persons, including a senior BNP minister, have recently been sentenced to long prison sentences for abetting the militants. But statements of many of the arrested militants suggest an elemental link between them and the Jamaat-e-Islami, which has been denied by Jamaat. This is another matter that cannot wait to be sorted out. Unless the militants' sponsors are identified and put out of action it would be difficult to make a success out of our anti-terror strategy.
For all latest news, follow The Daily Star's Google News channel.
Comments