Since 1971, Pakistan has evolved into a praetorian state plagued by army interventions and corrupt civilian governments. Nevertheless, the tunnel-vision of General Musharraf triggered a political implosion in 2007, and widespread dismay over the assassination of Benzir Bhutto has led Pakistanis to vote overwhelmingly for unfettered civilian rule and the diminishment of religious parties. In contrast, the Bangladesh Army seems intent on returning control to civilians, having remained averse to power for the past seventeen years. Furthermore, Bangladeshi society isn’t nearly as Islamicized as Pakistan’s, though Jihadi groups stand ready to exploit the government’s weaknesses. Milliam takes a hard look at the political and religious realities of both countries, especially the al-Qaeda-linked jihadi networks that threaten to permanently turn Pakistan into an ideological state. He also considers Islam’s undeniable influence on the culture of both societies, and, in turn, the influence of these cultures on the tone and expression of Islam.
‘মুজিব ছিলেন কৌশলী, তিনি চেয়েছিলেন তার ন্যায্য অধিকার। অপরদিকে ভুট্টো ছিলেন একরােখা, ক্ষমতার জন্য পাগলপ্রায় এবং এই ভুট্টোই মূলত: পাকিস্তান ধ্বংস করেছেন। একাত্তরে ভুট্টো যেসব কথা বলেছেন, যে গােয়ার্তুমি করেছেন পাকিস্তানের সংহতি বিনষ্টে নিঃসন্দেহে তা ছিল শেখ মুজিবের ছয় দফার তুলনায় অনেক বেশি আত্মঘাতী। তখন ক্ষমতালিপ্সায় ভুট্টো এতটাই পাগল হয়ে উঠেছিলেন যে, এক পাকিস্তানে দুই প্রধানমন্ত্রী তত্ত্ব দাঁড় করাতেও তিনি জেদ ধরেছিলেন। তাঁর উচ্চাভিলাষ এবং একরােখা ও কঠিন মনােভাবের কারণেই পূর্ব পাকিস্তানে বিদ্রোহের আগুন জ্বলে উঠেছিল এবং বাঙালির মন বিষিয়ে তুলেছিল। আর এসব কারণেই পাকিস্তানের সংহতি ধরে রাখা যায়নি। পাকিস্তান থেকে পূর্ব পাকিস্তান আলাদা হয়ে যায়।
Tajuddin Ahmad’s place in Bangladesh’s political narrative was assured when he formed the very first Bengali government in history in April 1971. But it was no surprise that he acted the way he did, for as Bangabandhu’s close, perhaps the closest, colleague, he was aware of what needed to be done in that hour of peril. His deep grasp of politics, his understanding of the workings of the forces of history and his courage in the face of adversity were shaped through years of studies of politics and observations of human nature. But, again, if Tajuddin’s moment of glory came through his leadership of the War of Liberation in the inspirational light of the incarcerated Father of the Nation, his despair manifested itself in his efforts to beat back those who undermined him to no end. Yet the intellectual in him refused to throw in the towel until it became rather uncomfortable for him to bear the pressure any longer. He walked away from power and soon was compelled by sinister men to walk into prison, from where he and his Mujibnagar colleagues would not emerge alive. Tajuddin Ahmad was Bangladesh’s socialist dream. A nightmare soon killed the dream. He made a difference in 1971. And he was cut down in 1975. This is the story of a statesman who goes on being our reason for pride.
The idea of exploitation is centrally important in Marx. For Elster, the importance of exploitation in Marxism is two fold. First: the presence of exploitation in a society provides a ground for normative criticism that exploitation is wrong and exploiters are morally condemnable and hence, it ought to be abolished. Secondly: exploitation can provide the exploited with a ground for taking individual or collective action against the system and therefore enters into the explanation of such action. That is, Marx's
Sheikh Mujibur Rahman in his book The unfinished Memoirs wrote how as a school boy he perceived the social the poitical differences between hindus and muslims. He also wrote how he worked as a worker and councillor of the all India Muslim League. The overall effect of All India Muslim League in shaping the current geopolitical reality of the Indian Subcontinent has been enormous. However there is no detailed study of the All India Muslim League. The Present study is an humble effort to fill the gap to some extent.
