Mr. Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury wrote an article on the Government's angry response to Mr. James F. Moriarty's remark that Bangladesh needs to lift the state of emergency.
"Why the present government in Bangladesh was angry on Mr. Moriarty´s comments? Because he emphasized on lifting state of emergency? Because he spoke in favor of reinstating democracy? Because he spoke in favor of human rights?"While I agree to the point that state of emergency should be lifted, I completely support the reaction of the Bangladesh Government. It has the right to express its opinion not being cowed by representative of another nations's remarks.
The political scene has become muddy because of these kinds of diplomatic interventions. The 1/11 episode was cooked up by these diplomatic initiatives. Every now and then you here some diplomat springing up and throwing remarks on each possible issues. Just imagine can the Bangladeshi ambassador to USA say such things on US domestic issues without any repercussion? Is this the diplomatic norm they are exercising?
Mr. Shoaib Chowdhury tried to prove with propaganda style logics that Bangladesh is gradually slipping towards anti American block. He wonders if Bangladesh wish to become ultra Nationalists and anti Americans to show red eyes to Washington.
I am surprised with Mr. Chowdhury's remarks that all well of Bangladesh lies in showing allegiance to USA. Well nodding to everything what and how USA says may work at personal level as Mr. Chowdhury thinks. But I think Bangladesh is maturing to decide on its own its policies. These can be criticized constructively. But Bangladesh does not require to bow to demand; show allegiance or red eye to any nation.
Update: Shafiur has more on Moriarty.