A Recent Event

I would like to share an event that took place recently. Here at Harvard we have seminars that are organized on a regular basis by the students themselves. The speakers are students and topics are suggested by us and selections made by a committee of our fellow students.

I had suggested the topic of human rights violations by the current government of Bangladesh. Most of the committee members are friends of mine, or so I thought. Eventually, the committee decided to host a seminar on a somewhat similar topic and invited me to present. The topic selected was, “Living in exile,” which was fine with me given that my family has lived in exile for five long years and I am now a prime target for the current regime of Bangladesh.

I then found out that one of the committee members, a Bangladeshi none the less, had emailed the entire committee that I was biased as I was a member of one of the political dynasties and my mother was in jail for corruption. Of course, this student did not mention that there has been absolutely no trial against my mother and her detention has repeatedly been ruled illegal by our Appeals Court. This surprised me even more because I had considered this student a friend and had discussed my topic with her and she had acted very supportive.

Still, I presented my topic from a human rights angle, along with two other classmates who are also in exile. I am a man of principle and I do not accept human rights violations for any reason. Corruption can be eliminated without, torture, murder and detaining people indefinitely without a trial. In fact, I believe that an oppressive regime is itself no better than the corrupt it claims to fight.

After my presentation there was a question and answer session. During this the Bangladeshi student who tried to sabotage my presentation took the microphone and made a lengthy speech about how I was biased. I actually had to interrupt her and ask if there was a question in there somewhere. She finally asked a couple of questions but they were so irrelevant that I don’t even remember them.

Since she raised the issue, I let the audience know what she had done behind the scenes. I pointed out one fact; she did not dispute that detention without trials, torture and murder were being undertaken by this regime. This is a common theme I have noticed with those who support this regime. They never address the issue of human rights violations, except to say, “Well, we don’t condone them.” Well if you don’t condone them, what does it say about your principles if you are supporting a regime that is using torture, murder and illegal detentions as a means of law enforcement?

This student also went on to say how the political dynasties were ruining Bangladesh and a good man like Mohammed Yunus (our Nobel prize winner) could not take leadership. I find this hilarious because no one stopped Yunus from forming a political party. In fact, he did so even while all political activity was banned. While my party members were arrested simply for getting together for dinner in one house, Yunus was actively supported by this regime in trying to form his party. As it turned out that he could not find anyone else to join him because he has very little popular support. It appears to me that this student does not believe the people of Bangladesh should choose their leadership, but that it should be chosen only the elite few such as her.

No one handed my mother the post of Prime Minister. She was elected by the people of our country. She did not even ask to be the President of our party. She was elected in absentia while in exile! And I certainly will not have the help of the military or the elite if I join politics. I will have to run for any post within the party as well as in national elections.

This student’s husband was also present at the seminar. He is also Bangladeshi, from a very wealthy family. He took the microphone and challenged me, “Is there a government order that you are exiled, yes or no?” I responded that there was clearly the threat of arrest against me but he tried to corner me, “Just yes or no.” I told him this wasn’t a court of law, but this demonstrates that he was simply trying to manipulate the question to make it appear as though I was lying. Just like his wife, he was trying to divert attention from the issues of human rights that I had presented.

The story does not end there. As I was leaving, the husband started getting in my face and challenging me. He kept trying to egg me on with one personal attack after another; “You’ve never even lived in Bangladesh. You’re like that Afghani guy sitting far away criticizing our country,” “You never say one good thing about Bangladesh. Go on, say one good thing.” He would not let me walk away and kept attacking me in this manner until a Pakistani friend of mine intervened. It was quite ironic, a Pakistani stopping a confrontation between two Bangladeshis!

This just goes to prove my point. Just like all that support this regime, neither the husband nor the wife actually ever denied that human rights violations were taking place. In fact, neither of them even said these violations must stop, which is a testament to their lack of principles. Instead they tried to attack me personally to divert the issue. It’s the oldest political trick in the book.

Unfortunately for them, they really did not have anything to attack me with. The crowds that showed up during my various tours throughout Bangladesh in the previous two years are my testament. I’ll take the support of the majority of my people over the support of the elite few any day.