Cafe attack in Dhaka proves IS footprints in Bangladesh

ISLAMABAD: Najamuddin Shaikh, Former Foreign Secretary on Saturday said that earlier the
Bangladesh government denied the presence of Daish (Islamic State) in Bangladesh but after
the organised caf attack in Dhaka on Friday it has confirmed that there are footsteps of the IS
in the country.
He expressed these views while talking to Daily Times.
Analysing the situation in the aftermath of Dhaka caf attack, Ambassador Shaikh said that
maybe the Islamic State had strong links with local extremist groups in Bangladesh, but after the
caf attack, it seemed that the group had a strong presence in the country.
Earlier, whenever the issue of IS activities was highlighted in Bangladesh, the government of
Sheikh Hasina was not ready to accept it. After, this incidence the government may realise the
actual situation. He said in earlier incidents the Jamaat-e-Islami Bangladesh and other local
groups were blamed for terrorism and action was taken against them. But, now they might take
action against the IS.
Dr. Nazir Hussain, Professor at Quaid-e-Azam University feared that although, the responsibility
of the attack had been claimed by the Daish, but it seemed that the unnecessary hanging of
pro-Pakistani leaders was the real cause. However, both India and Bangladesh may blame
Pakistan.
He said that the Dhaka attack signifies the vulnerabilities of the Bangladesh government and
society for religious extremism and radicalisation.
Foreign Office Spokesperson Nafees Zakaria told Daily Times that all Pakistanis residing in
Dhaka, diplomats or others and their families were safe.
According to media reports in the recent spate of killings, claimed by rgw IS and rgw Al Qaeda
in respect of liberals, foreigners and religious minorities, almost two dozen publishers writers,
activists, liberals, foreign aid workers and members of minorities had been murdered in
Bangladesh. Even on Friday, a Hindu temple worker was killed.

Hard talk
TARIQ KHOSA
IT is high time that tough questions were asked of those who wield authority in Pakistan. If we
claim to be a democracy then our citizens have a right to know what is rotten in the state of our
nation today.
Questions must start with the prime minister, who wields the highest position in office even
though he has ceded much of his powers to Caesar, especially on national security and foreign
policy issues. We wish him a speedy recovery and good health. He is an exceptionally lucky
politician, having become the head of the government for a third time unprecedented in the
chequered history of our Constitution that has been frequently trampled on by military boots.
This time he has beaten his own record: of governing for more than three years in a single tenure.
But the question remains whether he has learnt from past mistakes and managed to improve
leadership and governance.
Mr Prime Minister, during this time of convalescence, kindly take a moment to think about some
key governance issues. First is the matter of corruption in our polity. Do you agree with the army
chief when he says that crime and corruption have a nexus and pose a serious national security
threat?
The prime minister has frittered away opportunities to build the capacity
of civil institutions.

Are the Panama Papers a non-issue for the ruling elite, something to be brushed under the
carpet? You have addressed the nation twice and presented your familys case before the
National Assembly. You are obviously concerned that your family name not be tarnished. But
isnt the nation justified in seeking probes into matters of alleged tax evasion and avoidance,
laundering, kickbacks and corruption? If so, should you not ask for an independent commission
of inquiry starting with your family? As a holder of public office, arent you morally bound to
demonstrate that you and your kin are the first to be held accountable? If the familys accounts
and investments are clean and transparent, there is nothing to fear. It takes courage to lead by
example.
Let us also turn to other pertinent governance issues. According to Ibn Khaldun, the greatest
quality of a ruler is the ability to assign everybody to his or her proper station. Have you fulfilled
this obligation as chief executive? You have avoided appointing a regular foreign affairs minister
is there no suitable parliamentarian for the position, or is it mistrust and insecurity that prompt
you to hold on to this portfolio? Caught between an adviser and a special assistant, the ministry
is clearly directionless. Resultantly, foreign policy formulations and responses to regional and
global challenges are deliberated at the army headquarters. What message are you sending to

your citizens and international stakeholders? This is indicative of indecision and weak civilian
authority.
You also initially kept the portfolio of defence minister, and then gave this additional charge to a
minister already grappling with a daunting energy crisis. He has failed to prove his mettle and
appears sidelined in defence-related matters. We would have wished to see him sitting with the
military brass and making a case, rather than confined to a corner with his civilian colleagues
when summoned to GHQ. This reflects poorly on civil-military relations.
Let us turn our attention to national security issues. Since taking office, your government has
failed to come up with a national security policy. Despite the creation of a national security
division headed by a competent diplomat and a retired general as national security adviser, the
Cabinet Committee on National Security has not been effectively utilised by you for institutional
debates on the formulation of national, regional and global security strategies. Instead, a huddle
of select kitchen cabinet colleagues and advisers and frequent one-on-ones with the army
chief clearly indicate a pattern of personalised, secretive and selective decision-making on
issues of national and international significance.
The APS tragedy of Dec 16, 2014 provided you an opportunity to lead the nation. The working
group of professionals who drafted NAP came up with a 21-point plan. The first and most
important point was for you to lead the war personally as the commander-in-chief of an
embattled country by reviewing implementation of the plan with all civilian and military
stakeholders daily. Why was this important role deleted from the plan? This abdication of
responsibility has resulted in a void of leadership being filled by none other than the army
chief. Can one begrudge the stronger and more disciplined institution for having invariably made
its presence felt?
The organisation for steering coordination and operations in the war against militancy has been
ignored by you. Under the law, Nacta is supposed to work directly under the prime minister.
Instead, it is confined to being a wing of the interior ministry. Though chairman of its board you
have not held a single meeting in three years, despite the files gathering dust. Is this the way to
lead civilian law enforcement agencies efforts?
On Jan 21, 2015, during a NAP implementation meeting, the army chief asked you to freeze all
other projects and divert funds towards law enforcement for the next two years in order to build
the capacity of criminal justice institutions, since the clause on military courts would expire by
then. While ignoring this valid suggestion, could you not predict the militarisation of internal
security strategies as the logical outcome? The opportunity to build civilian justice institutions
was, unfortunately, frittered away the biggest casualty of which is the rule of law.

Last but not least, let me caution you: great resentment is building within the police services as
the interior ministry has stopped recommending gallantry and meritorious services awards for
sometime now. Are the numerous police officials who lay down their lives in the line of duty not
to be recognised? Is this the kind of leadership that the interior minister is providing as
counterterrrorism czar? Policemen and women would be justified in feeling that you do not care
for them.
This is not the way wars are won. In this hour of trial, the nation needs bold stewardship.
The writer is a retired police officer.
Published in Dawn, July 2nd, 2016