Technology for all: Ensuring innovation serves the most vulnerable

University of Florida

Facebook

XLinkedInWeChatBlueskyMessageWhatsAppEmail

Technology is woven into the fabric of daily life—until it isn’t. While most people have access to powerful tools such as smartphones, technology also plays a crucial role in supporting individuals with mobility challenges, disabilities and other accessibility needs.

Yet, in an era when innovation shapes nearly every aspect of society, who ensures that technology benefits—not harms—those most at risk of being left behind? A growing coalition of researchers, policymakers and technologists is pushing for a national computing research agenda that prioritizes ethical, inclusive and responsible technology development.

The Computing Research Association recently published a paper emphasizing the need to empower and protect vulnerable populations through:

· Ethical development practices that prevent harm

· Resources and Incentives for researchers and innovators to engage with vulnerable communities

· Enhance training models to empower professionals’ engagement efforts

· Accountability measures to ensure ongoing assessment and harm mitigation

These recommendations underscore the need for a collaborative approach, where policymakers, technologists and community advocates work together to ensure that emerging innovations are able to serve everyone.

“By developing design principles that address the needs of all populations, we can ensure that technologies are robust and spur new innovations,” said Kevin Butler, director of the Florida Institute for Cybersecurity Research and a co-author of the paper. “We hope these recommendations provide a roadmap for future technology design.”

Vulnerable populations often experience overlapping challenges that amplify access barriers. One in four people has a disability, one in four experiences domestic violence, and one in nine lives in poverty. Without safeguards, technology can unintentionally reinforce these inequalities.

From AI-driven hiring algorithms with built-in biases to healthcare technologies that overlook communities, the risks of unchecked innovation are real. That’s why experts are advocating for stronger governance models, accountability frameworks and inclusive participation to ensure that technology protects and empowers those who need it most.

With a push for shared infrastructure, incentives for ethical research, and specialized training for tech professionals, this initiative aims to bridge the gap between cutting-edge innovation and real-world social impact.

THE NEW WORLD DISORDER

Ahmet T. Kuru 

Published March 23, 2025

DAWN

 

US President Donald Trump wags a finger at Ukrainian President Vlodoymyr Zelenskyy during a press conference at the White House on February 28, which devolved into a shouting match as the two leaders clashed over the future of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine | Reuters

The dispute between US President Donald Trump and Ukrainian President Vlodymyr Zelensky in the White House did not occur by chance. On the contrary, it was a calculated move designed to signal to everyone — especially Republican Party elites — the kind of foreign policy Trump intended to pursue the following four years.

ISOLATIONISM OR GLOBALISM

The tension between isolationist and globalist tendencies in US foreign policy has existed for over a century. One of the most significant expressions of globalist aspirations came in 1918, when President Woodrow Wilson outlined his Fourteen Points, advocating for a new world order after World War I. Wilson proposed the establishment of the League of Nations. However, when the League was formed, the US senate refused to join, demonstrating America’s strong isolationist reflex.

Americans have their reasons for supporting isolationism. The US is geographically shielded by two oceans and shares borders only with Canada and Mexico, providing it with security. Moreover, its location keeps it distant from Europe and Asia, reinforcing the inclination to avoid entanglement in foreign conflicts.

Another reason for an inward-looking isolationism is the vast size and internal diversity of the US. Living in a federation comprising 50 states and a landmass nearly 40 times the size of the UK, Americans often find their own country sufficient for engagement and exploration, reducing the necessity of travelling to the rest of the world.

From Ukraine to Gaza, US President Donald Trump’s foreign policy favours strength over stability. But with a divided nation and strained alliances, will his approach hold?

Despite all these conditions, the US adopted a globalist foreign policy after World War II. The US defeated Japan and Germany and then pursued a global containment policy against the Soviet Union.

During this period, the US accounted for nearly 40 percent of global economic production. American companies’ need for new international markets and Americans’ increasing dependence on oil imports made globalist policies an economic imperative.

With the collapse of the Soviet Union, the Cold War ended. Yet, a decade later, the September 11, 2001 attacks ushered in a new global priority: the ‘War on Terror’. The George W. Bush administration invaded Iraq and Afghanistan. Although Barack Obama viewed these invasions as strategic mistakes, his administration largely maintained globalist policies.

Trump, in contrast, put forward the slogan “America First” in his first term, signalling a shift toward isolationism. However, his presidency saw few substantive changes in foreign policy. After Trump, the Joe Biden administration reasserted the Western alliance under US leadership, in response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

Immediately after his re-election, President Trump moved to cut off support for Ukraine, using pro-Russian rhetoric to sever the US from the Western bloc and abandon its perceived role in maintaining the world order.

CHAOS AT HOME, CHAOS IN THE WORLD

Trump’s stance on two major war zones reflects a consistent pattern: siding with the strong against the weak. In Gaza, he openly suggests expelling Palestinians — an idea even Israel refrains from stating outright. In Ukraine, he falsely claims that Zelensky is an unpopular dictator who initiated the war — an accusation so extreme that even Russia does not make it.

Trump’s suggestion about Gaza contradicts international law and numerous UN decisions. His actions towards Ukraine disregard the international treaties the US and Russia signed to guarantee Ukraine’s territorial integrity in exchange for surrendering its nuclear weapons. Yet, for Trump, such commitments are not important. His sole guiding principle is power.

Trump has the power to do whatever he wants in the short term. Republicans in Congress and the conservative-majority Supreme Court are unlikely to challenge a newly elected Republican president. But will he succeed in the long run? Three major factors undermine his prospects.

First, Trump won office with the support of only half the electorate, and his approval ratings have already fallen below 50 percent. His two main economic policies — raising tariffs and deporting a large number of immigrants — will drive up prices and inflation. Yet, he campaigned on lowering costs. Unlike some other societies, Americans have little tolerance for economic stagnation.

Second, Trump has no friends in international politics other than Russia and Israel. In just a month, he has managed to strain ties with America’s closest neighbour, Canada, and key European partners. The isolation in foreign policy will have an economic cost for American companies. It is impossible to keep enjoying the economic benefits of the global order while also trying to destroy this order. Tesla’s declining sales in Europe and tumbling stock prices for the past month signal that the economic fallout has already begun.

Third, Trump is taking these geopolitical risks at a moment of domestic turmoil. His decision to appoint Elon Musk to lead a new cost-cutting agency has led to mass layoffs of federal employees, with Musk publicly ridiculing bureaucrats as a class. This fuels the perception that the administration embraces confrontation — both at home and abroad.

Trump’s ultimate success remains uncertain. But one thing is clear: The global order that the US once led has been dismantled — by none other than the US president himself.

An Indonesian version of this article has been published in Indonesian daily Kompas and an Arabic version has been published on the Al Jazeera website

The writer is Professor of Political Science at Saint Diego State University in USA and the author of Islam, Authoritarianism and Underdevelopment, which has recently been translated into Urdu.

X: @prof_ahmetkuru

Published in Dawn, EOS, March 23rd, 2025

Italy’s talks with Starlink stalled: minister

Image Courtesy: Flickr

Reuters 

March 23, 2025 

ROME: Negotiations on a potential contract between Elon Musk’s satellite internet operator Starlink and the Italian government have stalled, reflecting broader geopolitical tensions, Italy’s defence minister said on Saturday.

Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni’s government is aiming to guarantee encrypted communications between the government, diplomats and defence officials operating in risky areas and Starlink is among the contenders to provide the system.

“It seems to me that everything has come to a standstill,” Guido Crosetto was quoted as saying by newspaper La Repubblica.

He said it was partly due to the fact that discussions moved from technical aspects to “statements” by and about Musk, without elaborating about those statements.

Starlink is a dominant force in the sector with around 7,000 active low-orbit satellites and it has been offering its services in Italy since 2021. Sources have told Reuters Rome was considering a five-year deal worth a total of 1.5 billion euros ($1.62 billion) with the company that is part of Musk’s SpaceX group.

But talks between the government and Starlink have sparked outrage among opposition politicians who question the wisdom of handing a national security contract to a foreign businessman and close ally of U.S. President Donald Trump.

Meloni has put the alliance with the United States at the heart of Italy’s foreign policy, but Trump’s actions, which have antagonised Rome’s European allies, are forcing her to perform a political balancing act.

At home, she is under pressure from her coalition partner, the far-right League, to keep supporting Trump and Musk.

On Friday, the League’s leader and Meloni’s deputy Matteo Salvini said he had a phone call with US Vice President JD Vance, in which he praised “the remarkable American capabilities in key areas such as satellite communications”.

Published in Dawn, March 23rd, 2025

Musk’s Entry in Telecom Market: Shake-up or Shake Down?

Prabir Purkayastha | 

20 Mar 2025

• 
  
• 
  
• 
  

Is India allowing Starlink’s entry into India's telecom as part of an attempt to placate Trump?

The announcements of Elon Musk's SpaceX-Starlink's tie-up with Reliance Jio (Jio is a trademark of Reliance Industries) and Bharti Airtel, the two dominant players, raise a number of questions. The two key questions are: i) Will it mean a greater monopolisation in telecom services? ii) Will satellite spectrum be given to Starlink without auction? It also raises questions about whether such satellite spectrum, a country's critical resource, should be given out for commercial operations in this way.

A preferential spectrum allocation to Starlink seems to be on the cards after its tie-up with Reliance Jio and Bharti Airtel. This will further cement the duopoly of Jio and Bharti in India's telecom market. The others, including Vodafone Idea and the state-owned BSNL, as shown in the table above, would be relatively distant competitors. Should such a market consolidation be allowed through the preferential allocation of satellite spectrum by the government? Will that not increase the monopoly power of the two major telecom players vis-a-vis the users?

The two leading telecom companies will also be dependent on a US company for critical communication services. Does this not go against India's strategic autonomy?

This also raises a larger issue: should a government that aims to play an independent role, allow its strategic telecom resources to come under the control of a foreign player?

If such a partnership between India's major telecom players and Starlink is allowed, let us make no mistake about who will control India's telecom services. Whichever entity controls the satellite feed—in this case, Musk's Starlink—effectively controls the telecom services. This is irrespective of Starlink’s shares in the companies providing the services; or its agreement with our telecom service provider.

What is Spectrum?

So, let us return to the spectrum, which readers of this column will remember was also central to the 2G license issue. What is a spectrum, and how does it relate to telecom or even television services?

Those familiar with spectrum from school physics will know that the electromagnetic spectrum covers radio waves and visible light, as well as the high-frequency X-rays and gamma rays used in medical imaging. For the purpose of 2G to 5G, we looking at the radio wave spectrum, starting from 900 MHz (MegaHertz, Hertz is cycles per second) for 2G, moving up to 26 GHz (GigaHertz). After former telecom minister A Raja's controversial 2G spectrum allocation, all the spectrum bands are now only given through auction. The Supreme Court, in its 2G judgement, laid down that the spectrum is a scarce natural resource and can only be allocated through a transparent and open auction. The existing 3G, 4G and 5G licenses have all been allocated after such auctions.

As late as May last year, the Supreme Court turned down an attempt by the government to allocate spectrum through administrative means. Simply put, if the spectrum is used to provide commercial services, it has to be auctioned. This raises serious questions about Airtel and Jio's attempt to tie-up with Starlink, whether it is an attempt to bypass the position that spectrum be allocated only through auction.

Interestingly, both Jio and Airtel had earlier opposed SpaceX's Starlink entry into satellite-based communication services. Jio had argued for an open auction of spectrum, while Airtel had agreed that an administrative allocation could be done, but only for five years and not 20, as SpaceX had asked. Both Jio and Airtel have tie-ups with satellite-based services, Jio with Luxemburg-based SES and Airtel with Eutelsat OneWeb. IN-SPACe, under the Department of Space, gave clearance in both these cases.

What is unclear is what spectrum usage charges have been set and how these have been set. And if competitive services for high-speed internet, as SpaceX offers, are set up, will there be different tariffs for the same services? Returning to the 2G Supreme Court judgement, how does the government allocate spectrum without a competitive bid? And if spectrum usage services have been fixed, how have they been determined?

Some Other Issues

Satellite communications have other issues as well. Existing space-based internet or SatCom are provided by geostationary satellites. These rotate at the same speed as the Earth, providing continuous satcom services to a large area. If there is a relative movement between the satellite in space and the ground, then a series of satellites have to be deployed with a proper handshake between the satellites so that the consumers do not notice any break of service. This is how low-earth orbit (LEO) satellites provide continuous telecom services, including broadband services, over large areas. SpaceX's Starlink has a little more than 7,000 satellites in orbit, with more to follow.

There is no regulation or international agreement on who can occupy how much of orbital space or how much a country or an entity can grab; there are long-term consequences of such a ‘might-is-right’ approach to orbits.

Even if space does not have restrictions, airwaves do. That means using space to beam up or down; in the case of the internet, two-way communication uses airwaves under the specific country's sovereign control. That means how much will the space-based communication players pay for the license? And yes, this spectrum has not yet been auctioned. While earlier Jio pushed for the auctioning of spectrum, we have to see what they actually do now. Will they also, like Airtel, push for administrative allocation of spectrum for satellite-based broadband services?

So why this sudden volte face by Jio and Airtel, from opposing Starlink to hitching their wagon to it? Did the government play a role in this “marriage”?

These are not the only questions. All of us are aware that the US, under President Donald Trump, has embarked on a path of capturing the territory of other countries, unilaterally imposing high import duties, and forcing countries to hand over critical natural resources to the US. This is a combination of a trade war and not just a neo-colonial relationship with other countries, but a reversal to colonial times.

This pressure led to Panama forcing the Hong Kong-based company to sell its shares of the Panama Canal to Black Rock, a US company. Trump has asked that Greenland be given to the US, not as an additional state but as a colonial possession. The US also demands that Ukraine hand over its mineral resources to "pay" for the US military and financial aid that it received in its war against Russia. Is India allowing Musk's Starlink entry into India's telecom a part of India's attempt to placate Trump? Will such a policy work? Or will it lead to even more demands?

This is not the US as the New Rome, the inevitable power and the sole global hegemon, as Francis Fukuyama proclaimed in the 1990s. This is a US that wants to reverse its weakening economy by simply extracting tribute, either by threats or by exercising its military and economic power. We should not have any illusion that a weakening hegemon will become more amenable to reason—quite the contrary. The illusion of power fades more slowly than their economic decline. This is the danger that Trump poses to the world. This is what we know from history.

ECOCIDE

Ecuador: Thousands of Barrels of Oil Spilled in Several Rivers

Pablo Meriguet |

 21 Mar 2025

• 
  
• 
  

In addition to the natural tragedy, thousands of people lack water to drink, which has caused great discomfort and protests in Esmeraldas.

A team of workers on the oil-contaminated water in Esmeraldas. 

Photo: Petroecuador/X

On March 13, a section of the SOTE pipeline, owned by the state-owned company Petroecuador, ruptured in Esmeraldas, a province of Ecuador. The failure occurred after a landslide in Achiote, near Quinindé. Several experts have stated that it is one of the worst oil spills in recent years in the country. As of now, the government of Daniel Noboa has not disclosed the number of barrels of oil spilled in Esmeraldas.

The Executive has declared an emergency in Esmeraldas due to the seriousness of the spill, which gravely affects the sector’s flora and fauna and the local population, which depends on the rivers for drinking water and fishing. The spill affected five rivers. According to the Secretariat of Environment, at least 80 kilometers of the Esmeraldas River are affected. The latest reports indicate that the oil-blackened water has reached Quinindé and Esmeraldas, the capital of the northwestern province.

Sabotage or mismanagement?

In an interview in Teleamazonas, the Secretary of Energy, Inés Manzano, affirmed that the spill occurred due to sabotage, according to a police intelligence report. She also warned the Mayor of Quito, Ecuador’s capital, Pabel Muñoz (a member of the Correista and opposition party, Citizen Revolution): “The information we have is that [there could be sabotage] in Papallacta, the source of Quito’s drinking water. So to Mayor Pabel Muñoz, tell the people who are sabotaging that this is prohibited,” implying that Muñoz knows those responsible and that it was committed to discredit Noboa’s government. 

The declarations of Secretary Manzano have caused much controversy. Muñoz, through an official statement, has requested that Secretary Manzano, following the law, inform and denounce the persons who, according to her, are behind the alleged sabotage. In addition, he requested that the Secretary of Defense militarize the facilities where Papallacta’s water is stored.

For her part, Luisa González, presidential candidate for the Citizen Revolution, said that the accusation of sabotage is nothing more than an excuse by the government for its poor management of the environmental crisis: “Before every crisis, the same excuse. They are embarrassing. Electric Crisis: They accused their cabinet of SABOTAGE, they pointed out the former Secretary of Energy, Andrea Arrobo, and justified her ineptitude. They said that a possum caused the blackouts and that someone opened imaginary floodgates. THE RESULT: months of inhuman outages and a paralyzed country. Spill in Esmeraldas: Now they blame [alleged] sabotage for the environmental disaster. THEY DID NOT REPAIR [the oil installations], they fired technicians and let the oil devastate rivers and communities. Everything [the Noboa government] touches, it destroys. THEY HAVE SABOTAGED THE COUNTRY. No more excuses, no more lies.” 

“We want water, and they send military”

For his part, President Noboa, who is currently running for re-election, has promised that the State will assume responsibility for the damages after the portentous oil spill: “Unlike in the past, this time [the State] will respond for its actions with the obligation to make the remediation in Esmeraldas. That is why it will create a fund with two objectives: environmental remediation and reparations to all the affected families.”

However, various settlers have criticized the delay in the national government’s actions, as well as the poor management of the natural disaster which may have affected more than 400,000 people. Several protests have been held in the towns that have been left without water supply demanding that the state act. “Where is [President] Daniel Noboa? We want him here. When he needs our vote, they come to the poor, but when he wins the elections he forgets about us. Where is the president!” demands one of the protesters with no water to drink.

In other videos, the victims can be seen collecting water from wells and denouncing that, so far, the State has not delivered water for their survival. Meanwhile, several people are taking advantage of the situation by selling a few liters of water at high prices. “We don’t know if the water we are collecting is contaminated with oil. We are taking a risk. No technician has come to our village to tell us if we can drink this water. Necessity forces us!” said an inhabitant of La Tolita.

For now, given the little reaction from the central and local governments, several civil organizations have launched campaigns throughout the country to collect water and food for the affected population.

An environmental tragedy

Several scientists have called the spill an ecological tragedy since it is estimated that in the Viche and Caple rivers, almost all the animals that inhabited their waters have died. In this regard, Eduardo Rebolledo, professor at the Catholic University of Ecuador, told the newspaper Primicias that the Viche and Caple are now “dead rivers”: “As a biologist, I feel sadness, because where there used to be fish, today there are containment nets and black water, without life, it is unpleasant…When we talk about dead rivers, it is a term I used to understand the azoic condition, that is, that the rivers lack life temporarily.”

According to Rebolledo, about 250 fish and other animals are affected by the spill. Regarding the magnitude and impact of the damage, the researcher from the Catholic University affirmed “Oil continues to be removed from this site, and, so far, we do not know how much has been spilled, because they do not inform. I don’t understand why the authorities hide the information… There is no mathematical formula that tells us [how long the recovery will last], it could last 30 or 45 days, it is going to depend on how fast and efficient the cleanup is, and on how benign nature is and helps us with rain.”

However, he also stated to Primicias that there may be long-term damage “An oil spill is always accompanied by heavy metals, which leave a trace over time and accumulate in the sediments. These metals can cause malformations and problems in aquatic life. Although each case has to be studied individually, there is a lot of literature that tells us that the persistence of heavy metals in marine life is associated with degenerative diseases for humans.”

Courtesy: Peoples Dispatch

 

Bangladesh is Walking Against its Own Existence

Amal Sarkar | 18 Mar 2025

• 
  
• 
  
• 
  

Rising incidents of violence and rapes amid the emboldening of extremist outfits are worrisome for both India and Dhaka.

File photo of protests in Bangladesh in 2024. Image Credit: Wikimedia Commons/Nahidhasan027

On Thursday, March 13, 2025, Dhaka Metropolitan Police (DMP) imposed a ban on public gatherings, rallies in the area near the Bangladesh Secretariat, Jamuna Guest House, at present the office-cum-residence of chief advisor to the government, Muhammad Yunus, two international hotels and Shahbagh Maidan. 

The capital city was witnessing severe protests against growing incidents of rape and gang-rape. The victims include a minor girl from Magura, a suburb in southern Bangladesh, who died on Thursday afternoon in Combined Medical Hospital. The incident sparked huge outrage in the country.

Incidents of murder, rape, theft, and robbery have become common in Bangladesh. Apaert from the Magura rape incident, shocking incidents of disrespect toward women and violations of their rights have been reported. Women have been prevented from playing football, despite, in recent times, the Bangladesh women's football team making the most significant contribution to the country by winning the SAFF Football Championship.

The historic Shahbagh Maidan has become the epicentre of the protests. Several incidences of violence between the protesters and security forces, including Bangladesh Army, have also been reported.

In addition, on March 7, the Bangladesh capital witnessed violent incidents when Hizb ut-Tahrir, a banned outfit since 2009, conducted an open march after making prior announcement. The ‘hide and seek’ between the police and Hizb supporters has become a hot topic of discussion in among people as the rally by the banned outfit was held defying the prohibitory orders imposed by DMP officials. This has led to allegations that the present dispensation in Bangladesh probably gave tacit support to the movement.

Hizb ut-Tahrir, which is banned in India and several other countries, is a proponent of unification of the Muslim world into a single Caliphate. As they are reportedly linked with extremist activities, the group is outlawed in many countries with Muslim majority.

Their march for Khilafat (Caliphate) in Dhaka was successful because the security forces were not seen as seriously trying to stop them. The two key messages emerged from this -- one, after 16 years of ban, the outfit seems organisationally strong. Two, the interim government “allowed” them enough free space to run their activities.

After former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina of the Awami League fled the country, this outfit had openly claimed credit for being among the key players who took part in organising the mass upsurge in the country.

Notably, India has expressed grave concern regarding activities by divisive forces in Bangladesh and has registered its protest over the “soft stand” taken by the interim government there.

Pressure is building on the Bangladesh interim government to bring Sheikh Hasina, who is in exile in India, back to the country and put her on trial. On March 12, 2025, in Dhaka, the International Criminal Tribunal of Bangladesh issued fresh arrest warrant against the former Prime Minister on charges of another mass killing in Dhaka, Shapla area in 2013.

On February 5, Sheikh Hasina addressed her party followers online. She described Bangladesh as a “terrorist state, offering sanctuary to militants and terrorists”. In response to this, the Tohidi public, meaning the people united in faith to Allah, demolished the house of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman at 32 Dhanmondi in Dhaka. This house was, in fact, the ‘mother's womb’ of Bangladesh. It is in this house that Mujib wrote the ‘Declaration of Independence’ on the night of March 25, 1971, which was broadcast on radio at the wee hours of March 26. Furthermore, the historic speech he gave on March 7, where he informally declared independence of then East Pakistan from the clutches of the Western counterpart.

The memories of Bangladesh's liberation movement and even earlier, the movement for self-determination, are all intricately linked to this house, much like the connection between a foetus and a mother's womb.

What is surprising is that neither the police nor the military made any effort to stop the destruction of such an important historical site. Even when the army reached the scene, they reportedly turned back. What’s more surprising is that the interim government did not strongly condemn the incident and merely issued a statement calling it ‘undesirable.’ The interim government has also remained silent against the havoc caused by extremists in the country.

Bangladesh is walking against its own existence. Secularism and the spirit of communal harmony are being made a mockery of.

In her speeches, Hasina held out a warning to the army and said they should not be a party to the “dubious acts” of the interim government. She declared that the United Nations would not take kindly to the army aiding and abetting a “terrorist state”. The deposed Prime Minister also referred to the large number of Bangladeshi army personnel who used to be drafted every year for duty abroad as part of the UN Peacekeeping Force, who were paid handsomely and looked forward to the opportunity to serve the UN.

The UN, however, may well stop giving this ‘lucrative’ opportunity to the Bangladeshi army, Hasina said, if they continued to help the interim government headed by Md. Yunus.

The address by Sheikh Hasina received widespread attention and predictably the interim government in Dhaka was upset, questioning the political propriety of the fugitive leader making “wild charges” from foreign soil.

The question is, why is India allowing Hasina to say all these things. In fact, the way the former Prime Minister of Bangladesh is describing her country's current situation is actually in line with the Indian government's stance. Declaring Bangladesh a “terrorist state” could be India's last resort. Before that, they will wait to see which direction Bangladesh takes.

What is undeniable, however, is Sheikh Hasina’s record of nursing zero tolerance to terror. Her government had cracked down on terrorists and terror networks ruthlessly, and several terrorists were swiftly tried and sentenced to death. India benefitted from the crackdown as the Hasina government handed over several terrorists carrying out subversive activities in India. The Awami League government hanged several terrorists in 2013 and over the next three years claimed to have killed 80 terrorists and arrested 300 more.

Barely a month before Hasina’s ouster, the then chief of Counter Terrorism and Transnational Crime (CTTC) told the BBC that the back of terror networks had been broken. He had boasted that the terror outfits merely had some online presence and CTTC maintained a close watch on their activities. The situation has clearly changed since then.

On September 12, 2024, a month after Hasina was forced to flee, military and police raided houses in the Shah Ali locality of Dhaka and claimed to have arrested two suspects with terrorist links and seized arms and ammunition. The Bangladesh Army headquarters claimed in November that since August 5, the army had seized 6,000 illegal arms, 200,000 rounds of ammunition and arrested 2,500 criminals and militants.

Such drives against terrorists and militants have, however, receded in recent months. It is alleged that the courts have, in fact, been releasing a large number of convicted terrorists on the ground that they were victims of persecution by the Awami league government. Mahfuz Alam, introduced by the Md. Yunus as the “mastermind” of the movement that overthrew Hasina was allegedly a member of the banned Jamaat-ul-Mujahideen. As many as six advisors to the interim government are allegedly members of one radical outfit or the other.

It is also significant that the head of Ansararullah Bangla Team or ABT, Jasim Uddin Rahmani, was freed on bail just 20 days after Sheikh Hasina fled the country. Arrested in 2013 for the killing of blogger Rajiv Haider and convicted, Rahmani was released as early as August 24, 2024. ABT is said to have links with Al-Qaeda in the Indian subcontinent and Ansar-al-Islam, both banned outfits. Significantly, after he was released on bail, he appears to have melted away with his whereabouts ‘unknown’. 

Hasina alleged that hordes of criminals and terror suspects have been released since August 5, 2024, which is now being hailed as the new Independence Day in Bangladesh. She claimed that 389 Awami League leaders and supporters were lynched or burnt to death in Bangladesh between July and October 2024, thousands have been arrested on trumped up charges and many more have fled after their homes and businesses.

As radical Islamist outfits grow in influence, security risks for India have reportedly increased. A report in the mainstream media last month quoted sources in Indian intelligence agencies as saying that they had information of renewed infiltrations and revival of sleeper cells and safe houses in India. The reports also pointed to a racket busted in West Bengal of forging passports and visa and the arrests of suspected terrorists from West Bengal and Tripura in recent months.

West Bengal and major North Eastern states share a long stretch of border with Bangladesh and hence are particularly vulnerable to “terror activities” from across the border.

More worryingly, on December 6, 2024, the Director General of Prisons, Bangladesh conceded that 174 militants had been freed from prisons during the previous four months. Altogether 2,247 prisoners, including 88 on the death row, also escaped in jailbreaks since July last year.

Sheikh Hasina also claimed that several terrorists convicted in the bomb blast in Holy Artisan restaurant in Dhaka in 2016, in which 20 people were killed including seven Italians, seven Japanese and an Indian, have also been released from prison. The memorial outside the restaurant put up in the memory of slain policemen has also been reportedly demolished.

Besides these disturbing incidents, a few other steps of the interim government of Bangladesh have turned out to be cause for worries to India. Last year, after the mass upsurge, statues of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman were vandalised. Important souvenirs and landmarks of the ‘liberation struggle’ were also destroyed.

In such a situation, what can bring about far-reaching consequences is the proposal for amendment of the existing Constitution of Bangladesh. In the first Constitution enacted immediately after the establishment of independent Bangladesh under the leadership of Sheikh Mujib, the four main principles of governance declared were -- nationalism, socialism, democracy and secularism-- in line with the concept of the liberation struggle.

The present constitution amendment commission, headed by Prof Ali Riaz has suggested the main principles of 'equality, human dignity, social justice, pluralism and democracy ' and has excluded ' secularism' and 'socialism'.

Meanwhile, the student leadership has raised the demand for election of a constituent assembly for drafting a new Constitution keeping in consideration the aspirations of the July-August upheavals. 

Pakistan is an Islamic state since inception. Many changes to the original Constitution passed under the leadership of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman were brought in by the two military generals -- Ziaur Rahaman and Hussain Muhammad Ershad. The former introduced the phrase ‘Bismillah Rahmanir Rahim' as the opening lines of Constitution. The latter declared 'Islam' as the state religion. Hasina brought back the word ‘secularism', leaving, however, the other two additions introduced by her predecessors intact.

After crossing of the centenary of Sheikh Mujib, the future of Bangladesh is swinging between the two extremes, ‘Mujibbad’ meaning Mujibism and ‘Mujib baad’ denoting the dethronement of everything that Mujib stood for.

According to the proposed amendments, the basic differences between the constitutions of Bangladesh and Pakistan would wither. And it may be no surprise if demands for deletion of the two words ‘secularism’ and ‘socialism’ from the Indian Constitution, too, gather momentum.

The writer is Executive Editor, The Wall, and former Senior Editor, Times of India. The views are personal.

 INDIA

To Save Democracy: A Broader, Stronger, Secular Alliance Need of the Hour

Ram Puniyani | 20 Mar 2025

• 
  
• 
  

The INDIA bloc needs to sort out contradictions and include social groups in a broader platform, as seen during the 2024 Lok Sabha elections.

The opposition INDIA bloc ahead of the 2024 Lok Sabha elections. Image: PTI file photo

The V Dem (Sweden-based institute that studies quality of governments) report’s observations about India, as reported in The Hindu newspaper, points out “Noting that almost all components of democracy were getting worse in more countries than they were getting better, the report singled out freedom of expression, clean elections, and freedom of association/civil society as the three worst affected components in autocratising countries.”

The report aptly summarises the ground reality in India. To cap it all, India is seeing the worst treatment of its minorities. The Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh-Bharatiya Janata Party (RSS-BJP) combine has lately resorted to using Hindu festivals/congregations as yet another tool to intimidate the minorities. This was amply witnessed in the pattern of Ram Navami celebrations, the Holi celebrations and the Kumbh congregation.

This rising pattern of authoritarianism of the ruling dispensation from the past one decade was the major factor in the coming together of most of the opposition parties to form the INDIA bloc, despite many inner contradictions. The overall impact of the coalition, with Congress leader Rahul Gandhi’s Bharat Jodo Yatra and Bharat Jodo Nyay Yatra and the social groups forming platforms, such as Eddulu Karnataka and Bharat Jodo Abhiyan, impacted the 2024 Lok Sabha results and the target set by BJP to cross 400 seats was quashed.

It is true that the progression of the INDIA bloc did not go in the desired direction of forming an ongoing platform for state elections. This was one of the reasons for the setback to the INDIA bloc partners in Maharashtra and Haryana Assembly elections. The added cause was the renewed attempt by all RSS affiliates to work for BJP. This is nothing new despite the statement by BJP president J.P. Nadda that his party does not need the help of RSS as it is now capable of winning on its own.

It seems the important need of the INDIA bloc to strengthen itself after the Lok Sabha elections has been ignored, with many alliance constituents declaring their aloofness from this, and the biggest opposition party, Congress, not having taken any major initiative.

It is worthwhile to note that the Communist Party of India (Marxist) or CPI(M), the ideologically strong component of this alliance, is having second thoughts on the issue, as its acting general secretary Prakash Karat stated that “The opposition INDIA bloc was formed for the Lok Sabha elections and not state polls…” and called for a broader platform of secular opposition parties.  

Karat also said the alliance should be looked at with a broader perspective so that it would not be stifled solely by electoral politics. This is paraphrased by many Left leaning intellectuals, as saying that BJP was not exactly a fascist party. Like economist Prabhat Patnaik reasons that while “neoliberal capitalism generates a “fascist presence” – manifesting in right-wing authoritarian movements, xenophobia, ultra nationalism, and eroded democratic norms – it does not necessarily recreate the conditions for full-fledged “fascist states” like in the 1930s.”

While many terms have been used for the rising politics of Hindutva nationalism, neo fascism, proto fascism and fundamentalism, the point is that no political phenomenon repeats itself in the same way. Today, Hindutva nationalism has many features close to that of fascism, which was the initial inspiration for RSS founders, particularly M.S. Golwalkar, who in his, We or Our Nationhood, said, “To keep up the purity of the Race and its culture, Germany shocked the world by her purging the country of the Semitic Races — the Jews. Race pride at its highest has been manifested here. Germany has also shown how well-nigh impossible it is for Races and cultures, having differences going to the root, to be assimilated into one united whole, a good lesson for us in Hindusthan to learn and profit by.”

We, in India, are witnessing many traits of fascism, like the ‘golden past’, aspiration for Akhand Bharat, targeting minorities and presenting them as “enemies of the nation”, authoritarianism, promoting big business, stifling the freedom of expression and dominating the social thinking. Here we are witnessing the intolerance to freedom of expression as recently witnessed in the case of Tushar Gandhi, great grandson of Mahatma Gandhi, saying that “…the RSS is poison. They are trying to destroy the soul of the country. We should be fearful about that because if the soul is lost, everything is lost.” Tushar Gandhi was asked to apologise and take back his words. He did neither, and is now facing death threats.

With the vast spread of RSS and hundreds of its organisations, thousands of its pracharaks (propagandists) and lakhs of its activists, it is threatening the ‘idea of India’ that emerged from the Freedom Movement.

The values of the freedom movement got expression in our Constitution, which is based on the equal right of all the citizens and is inclusive to the core. RSS has planted its ideology, which is opposed to the values of freedom movement and Indian Constitution, through its vastly growing network.

The Sangh initially created hatred for Muslims by abusing history, as witnessed currently in Maharashtra where demands for uprooting the tomb of Aurnagzeb is priority number one for the ruling BJP. Currently, it is also targeting the major leader of the freedom movement, Mahatma Gandhi, by propagating that he had no role in getting us freedom, with many social media posts going to the extent of saying that Gandhi “sabotaged” our freedom movement.

The list is long. What is to be done today? Karat is right that a broader secular platform has to be created. The INDIA coalition was precisely the first step in this journey. The need is to further strengthen this alliance. The rough edges in the coalition need to be smoothened and CPI(M), with over million members, can play a major role in boosting this alliance further, despite some contradictions among the coalition partners. For bigger reasons, small sacrifices by the constituents are mandatory.

To back this up, social groups also need to continue their great work in the wake of 2024 Lok Sabha elections, which the National Secular Coalition can initiate. The exact characterisation of the present regime, fascist or having “elements of fascism”, or whatever, the strategy in India should be a broader platform, with more energy and dynamism, which we witnessed on the eve of 2024 Lok Sabha elections.   

 

The writer is a human rights activist, who taught at IIT Bombay. The views are personal.