Donald Lu came on a visit from the United States. He is so well-known in Bangladesh's politics that his name is enough. There is no need to elaborate on who he is or what his position is in the US state department.
There is no reason for the Bangladesh government to be displeased with what he said publicly during his visit. But no sooner had Lu returned to his country, than the US announced its sanctions on former army chief Aziz Ahmed.
The people were certainly not prepared for such an announcement. The foreign minister did say, however, that the Bangladesh mission had already been informed about the matter.
In the meantime it was learnt that a member of the Bangladesh parliament, Anwarul Azim, went missing in India and later was killed. The manner in which he was killed created a sensation. But what created more of a stir were the various allegations of crimes and misdeeds, including gold smuggling, that emerged against the parliament member. He had at one time been on the Interpol warrant list. He was accused in 21 cases. All such information came to the fore.
The manner in which elections are being held in the country, it is only natural that people are losing interest in the election and the nomination process. But even so, after the murder to Anwarul Azim, the question arose as to why and how the ruling party nominated such a person.
On the heels of this incident came the court order to seize the moveable and immoveable property of former police chief Benazir Ahmed on grounds of corruption. The dramatic turn of events concerning Benazir has given rise to surprise and has become the talk of the town.
From what has been learnt so far, Anwarul Azim's killing cannot be termed a 'political killing'. But it has plenty of political significance. It has brought to the fore just how corrupted the country's politics has become. In that sense, the allegations of corruption and irregularities against the two former chiefs of two forces are also not 'political', but have deep political impact.
Both the former army chief and the former police chief are under US sanctions. They were both considered to be persons very close to the present government. More importantly, no one would be given positions of such vital importance unless they were extremely trusted by the government. The general public perception is that they played special roles in protecting the government's interests.
All three incidents have become focal issues of discussion in the country's politics.
The wealth that Benazir amassed was made while he was in service, particularly when he was the chief of police. That could not have happened without the knowledge of the government
The Anti-Corruption Commission has become extremely active against the former police chief Benazir Ahmed. It seems that they are going all out to get him. The speedy manner in which the orders came to seize his property, seems that he will not be left off the hook.
So has the government written off Benazir? But why? Has the government really taken up a drive against corruption? Or are they having to take this move under any special consideration?
Another question is, will former army chief Aziz face the same fate as Benazir? What about the others who have allegations of serious corruption against them? Will any of them be nabbed? Are any new sensations waiting around the corner?
There are no easy answers to these questions. But we can analyse the matter. There are speculations against the former police chief's conflict with certain powerful quarters. That could be the case, but it is hard to believe that this is the reason behind the action being taken against Benazir.
The wealth that Benazir amassed was made while he was in service, particularly when he was the chief of police. That could not have happened without the knowledge of the government. Taking action against such a person amounts to acknowledging the corruption of a police chief.
The start of ACC's case against Benazir means, in effect, admitting that Bangladesh's former police chief abused his power and amassed a massive amount of illegal wealth. It is also an acknowledgement that it is possible to resort to such extreme corruption and misuse of power while remaining in such an office. And this took place during the rule of the present government.
So why has the government chosen to go down this path?
It is clear that a political decision lies behind the government's move against Benazir. Finance minister Hassan Mahmood Ali has confirmed the issue when he said, the government supports the measures taken by the court against Benazir.
The government is not likely to take such a stance against Benazir unless some big stakes are involved. Such a stern political decision can be taken due to certain conflict or to halt any possible disorder.
The state of the country's economy is bad and may worsen in the days to come -- the economists have been highlighting this. The government itself is aware of this danger. The people feel that corruption is at the root of this predicament of the economy. Under such circumstances, it is important for the government to take certain anti-corruption measures. This will show that no matter how late, they are taking action against corruption.
Also, having stayed at the helm for such an extended time, the number of opportunists around the government has grown steadily. The government may feel the need to rein this in. There is no alternative, then, other than to take some harsh measures.
Time will tell whether these measures being taken by the government are just eyewash or whether they are sincere. This will be clear if an eye is kept on whom the government is taking action against, and against whom it remains silent.
Given the account of Benazir's land and property as revealed by ACC, this certainly must be seen and corruption unlimited. If the government wants to prove that it is taking action against corruption, then they have to take action against someone like Benazir. These matters may be behind the reason that he is being expended.
During his trip to Bangladesh this time, Donald Lu spoke about working with the government against corruption. The measures being taken against Benazir may be seen as part of that 'work'. If the government has to show that it is doing something against corruption, it is only logical to take action against Benazir who is under US sanctions. IMF also gave certain conditions linked to corruption and good governance.
The same considerations may be at work regarding former army chief Aziz Ahmed. If that is so, he too may face the same fate as Benazir.
The finance minister said, "The former army chief has been caught too. The matter came to light when the US imposed sanctions." The finance minister left it to the army to take action against him. But two days later, the road transport and bridges minister and general secretary of Awami League, Obaidul Quader said that if the ACC wants, it can investigate the allegations against the former army chief.
It is not just against these two that there are allegations of corruption and irregularities. There are such allegations against many persons. It will come as no surprise if ACC takes action against a couple more persons. After all, using anti-corruption initiatives during times of economic crisis is no new ploy.
Time will tell whether these measures being taken by the government are just eyewash or whether they are sincere. This will be clear if an eye is kept on whom the government is taking action against, and against whom it remains silent.
* AKM Zakaria is deputy editor of Prothom Alo and can be reached at [email protected]
* This column appeared in the print and online edition of Prothom Alo and has been rewritten for the English edition by Ayesha Kabir