Video : January to August 2021

 

Sinha Videos

---

January to August 2021

Images

No more yelp, O the people of Bangladesh

[ This was published in Dhaka Courier, Bangladesh on 23 November 2018]

Having arrived at the age of more than forty seven years of our hard-earned independence, we are still in a position to yelp, swindle and dwindle musically and rhetorically----political and/ or otherwise ---every time before elections to Parliament for a ‘free, fair and credible elections’’ and, as ill luck would have it, cumulatively and resultantly such Hobson’s choice is on more formidably also before elections to the 11^th parliament  scheduled be held on 30 December 2018.. This is indeed a groundbreaking irony of the fate of the nation. O Creator of Universes, let us be blessed with  an onward happy, prosperous and democratic state in the comity of the nations.

Let it be recalled with a sense of humiliation, suppression, oppression and suffocation that constitutional amendments and reforms, starting from 1973 to this very day, all tell us the truth of concentration of more and more powers in various shapes, forms and peculiarities in the hands of party/regime in power from time to time in the name of interests of the nation as a whole. What a funny it is that our leaders and statesmen (Mostly being called and drummed by the followers and a section of intelligentsia) like to feel free to fly very high allowing themselves to move with such currents and trends. There is a unique consensus between the political parties in Bangladesh. All speak in the same language, voice, volume and rhetoric while in power and while in opposition/ out of powers beats the same drum calling party in power autocrat in all respects.. Going to power it behaves like a king but when it is out of power it cries like an outcast. Let it be stopped for the sake of running and flowering democracy. Democracy cannot survive and continue without understanding and cooperation between and among parties, the ultimate players in position and opposition. Never take power as chess game and bear in mind that politics is for the people, by the people and of the people. Political parties and leaderships just carry such voice and aspiration of the people to put those into reality.. 

Actuality carries records that political activists customarily at the grassroots levels are dedicated, candid,, energetic and committed and they hardly hesitate to invest time, energy and money behind organization and leaderships in the expectation of meeting with better days leaving behind odds and worst landscapes. Researchers, political scientists and sociologists have meanwhile given birth to scores of theories on leaderships from different angles and views in the milieus of time, space and dimensions and the processes are on. Today recognized approach is that no single approach or theory is adequate to define, understand and evaluate a leader in right perspective. Each and every one had/has his/her own characteristics combining few or more or adding more in respective time, space and dimension. That’s why, comparisons between two leaderships shall never be in full if time, space and dimension paying due attention to the challenges, dilemmas and opportunities faced by them as well are not duly taken into account.

A leader emerges as dreamer, visionary with missions and goals taking leadership of the respective party first and people later as a whole. Therefore, leadership is not only a responsibility and accountability but also a dependable means for finding ways and alternatives to face challenges and dilemmas,  using and devising opportunities,  , ensuring and cementing deliberations and distributions in a fair mood and mode under all the circumstances, compelling or not. Its first manifestation takes place within a party and second manifestation rolls and radiates in a wider scale i.e. coast-to-coast. Former is foundation of leadership while later is development of leadership in a wider scale rolling gradually from national to regional to international hemispheres.

A leader may fall from his leadership characteristics because of many a reason. When such falling starts, this is called ‘moving towards perversion of leadership’’ and the standard is desolately unacceptable, it then clearly comes to be brown as ‘Perverted leadership. No doubt, for Bangladesh, it is an era of perverted leaderships in all most all areas of life. But there are lights even in the dark and those lights are our silver lining. ’

Therefore, instead of going into details of ongoing political crises, dilemmas and state of leaderships, it is better to look at the opportunities before us at this very moment. Sheik Hasina Administration has lot of attainments and failures over the last ten years. Having been out of .power (one may also conclude in a simple fashion ‘arrogantly typically without convincing reasons) for the last ten years, yes,, BNP rather in particular has become direct target and victim by the party in power extremely. People know all and BNP has now decided to take part in elections for many compelling reasons. Certainly it is without Chairperson Begum Khaleda Zia who has been behind the bar on charges of corruptions and Acting Chairman Tarek Rahman who has been staying in UK for a long and has now been convicted of a number of cases including 10 years rigorous punishment in jail. In the eye of law and the state Tarek Rahman is absconder/fugitive and necessary initiatives are on to bring him back to Bangladesh as early as possible. Under these peculiar circumstances, .Dr. Kamal Hossain is certainly a lifeboat for BNP. It is also supplementary gain for BNP that new political alliance called Jatiya Oikya Front headed by national leader  Dr. Kamal Hossain and 20-party alliance under BNP —all in a wider scale--  are contesting using BNP’s ;Sheaf of paddy as common electoral symbol. Electoral atmosphere, despite ruling party’s reluctance to withdraw so-called political cases and continuous drives to harass and hunt BNP activists, is more or less non-volatile and within the range of acceptability in comparison with past elections to Parliament. Welcome to BNP and its allies and thanks a lot to Dr. Kamal Hossain for playing a very landmark positive role in this regard.

In fact, Dr. Kamal is the personality who played main role to make Sheikh Hasina president of AL in 1981 paving her way smooth and realistic to come back to her motherland after of lapse of seven years in foreign lands. And now again it is Dr. Kamal who is playing a plosive historic role to put BNP on trek thus paving way smooth both for Khaleda Zia and Tarek Rahman.to have rejuvenated political re-start.

Whether AL agrees or not, truly a challenge has arisen for Hasina-led 14 party alliances. Hasina-led jote, (excepting Ershad’s Jatio party that will follow its own symbol), also chose to contest with a common electoral symbol ‘Boat’.  Both sides from their respective standpoints, attaching renewed and maximum importance and priority to choose and nominate the best ones to contest in the elections scheduled to be held on 30 December 2018.and come out successfully. People are really good enough to love our leaders,, noneless records show  they are also daring enough to prove otherwise, if a need arises. Nobody should forget that love and hatred go together in politics and the fate of political leaders may be miserable if there starts deviation from leadership proper.. Perverted leadership is a curse of the highest grade not only for a leader himself/herself but also for the country and the nation as a whole.

Keeping the 11^th elections to Parliament in factual perspective, let our leaderships,  in precise be fair and committed to the continuing and lasting of creeds and expressions of leaderships first and spread necessary perfumes to everywhere for a free, fair and credible elections to the 11^th Parliament. Above all, the party in power should all the time bear in mind that this is not the last elections for them rather more will come after every five years as stipulated in the constitution. Level playing field cannot be guaranteed unless the party in power is sincere and faithful to stand by Election Commission for holding a free, fair and credible election  in practice conducted by EC.

Therefore, voice I again ‘‘No more yelp, O the people of Bangladesh’

[ Dr. Sinha MA Sayeed,, Chairman of Leadership Studies Foundation and Columnist.

Contact: Sinha_sayeed611@yahoo.com]

Unified government, Divided government and Cohabitation in government

[This was published in Dhaka Courier on 01 February 2017

Speaking candidly, to understand, define and classify the formulas of government under various set-ups and circumstances in the context of time, space and dimension, yes, attempts have been on from the days of Aristotle down to present time. Reality unfolds the truth that within the fold of any system there also we meet with peculiarities and variations, be it presidential model or parliamentary one. More veracity is that even in pure presidential system there may be chasm between president and parliament while existence and continuance of the bled of the pure two models is potentially visible and vibrant. From such standpoints, here our concern involves Unified government, Divided government and Cohabitation in government mostly or to say more accurately are available distinctively in USA and France.

Unified government is a case of USA under its presidential system. It arises when one party controls the White House and both houses of Congress, and it's theoretically, if not practically all the time, easy to pass and enact legislation because of the shared goals held by members of the same party. Say for example, Donald Trump Administration and US congress.

 It is also called government trifecta. Trifecta is a recent addition to the English language. It first appeared in the early 1970s as a term for a horse-racing bet in which the first, second, and third place finishers are chosen in the correct order. Under such a state of standing in a parliamentary system Majority party/coalition forms government

The word has since broadened in meaning: it can now also refer to a group of three (usually desirable) things (such as “the trifecta of curing cancer, ending hunger, and putting an end to war"). It is found in everything from advertisements to media company names to casual speech.

Trifecta combines the prefix tri- (meaning “three”) with the last element in government trifecta, a word of American Spanish origin that refers to a horse-racing bet in which the first- and second-place finishers are chosen correctly.

Divided government refers to a situation in which one party switches the White House and another party controls one or both houses of the United States Congress say, Barak Obama Administration and US Congress. Here the While House was controlled by Democratic Party while the both Houses of Congress was under the command of Republican Party. Divided government is branded by some to be an undesirable product of the separation of powers in the United States' political system.

Even Unified government may face the fate of Divided government under the circumstances, exciting or not. Such possibility can stand up from widening chasm on issues and policies--- open or not--between the President and the Senate/House of Representatives or the both Houses of the Congress, though they belong to the same party. It is feared that this may crop during Donald Trump Administration.

Speaking in a limited sense and understanding, the taxonomy cohabitation can connote any number of people living together. And in a wider sagacity, ‘cohabit’ implies to ‘coexist’. For its basis it owes to Latin ‘cohabitare’. In course of time, it also got accommodated within the fold of politics and government with French Fifth Republic as Pioneer. ’Cohabitation in government’ does not occur in all systems of government. It is possible only in semi-presidential systems, such as France system, when the President is from a different political party than the majority of the members of parliament. The president is directly elected by the French people every five years. The French Constitution declares him head of state and gives him control over foreign policy and defense. After parliamentary elections—held every five years or sooner if the president calls them—the president appoints a prime minister.

But cohabitation in government does take place in all semi-presidential systems. Curiously enough, under the semi-presidential system being followed in Srilanka President, directly elected for a five-year term, is head of state, head of government and commander in chief of the armed forces. The president, responsible to Parliament for the exercise of duties under the constitution and laws, is subject to removal from office by a two-thirds vote of Parliament with the concurrence of the Supreme Court. Here Prime Minister who leads the ruling party in Parliament is treated as President’s deputy. In case of any vacancy to the office of the President, it is the Prime Minister who takes over as acting President. Markedly to be noted that remains here no scope for cohabitation in government because of the reality that, unlike the French System, there is no chance for President and Prime Minister for being elected from two different political parties.

Capitelizership’: Also as Perverted form of leadership

[Published in Bogota Free Planet, South America, on 2 August 2015 and on 10 August 2016 in Dhaka Courier, Bangladesh]

Is there any perverted form of the lexicon ‘Leadership? ‘It may at the outset sound a little problematic or beside the point in its entirety but its standing and necessity can hardly be gainsaid in conclusion. Reality unfolds the truth that the practice of leadership(s) from the very days of civilizations till date on earth under countless circumstances, conforming or not, is indeed mostly not in tune with its very spirit and vein. Caprices, disregards, connivances, deviations and so forth are on in full swing for which real taste and smell of leadership(s) aimed at the well-being of people/organization is a recurring asking for all. One may readily jump to a conclusion that such phenomenon of leadership(s) amounts to perversion of leadership(s). Therefore, arises a pertinent query what should be the befitting taxonomy for branding such perversion of leadership(s)? Of course, there is nothing to be worried at all, although attempts are on to suit the very purpose. Yes, in social sciences and in particular in politics and political science, we meet with various forms of government having analogous terminologies (antonyms) for perversions therein.

History carries record that It was Aristotle who in his epoch-making book ‘Politics’ written nearly 2500 years ago, presented three forms of government depending on numerical standing showing at the same time their perverted forms. In natural form, they are called Monarchy/Dictatorship Rule of One. Here the dictator with the profoundest sense of dedication and responsibility, works as a whole for the well-being of the people, Aristocracy i.e. Rule of Few. Here the few with the profoundest sense of dedication and responsibility, work as a whole for the well-being of the people and Polity i.e. Rule of Many. Here the Many with the profoundest sense of dedication and responsibility, work as a whole for the well-being of the people. In perverted form they are named Tyranny, Plutocracy and Democracy. Differences between natural form and perverted form imply that in the former interests and well-fare of the people are primarily ensured, defended and protected while in the latter form interests and welfare of those who wield power are essentially ensured, defended and protected.

Applying this very understanding, logic and formula of the forms of government set by Aristotle, there no denying the fact that Leadership(s) can as well be tasted and understood in today’s perspectives. In simple terms Leadership denotes art/practice of guiding group/people or organization. When a leader exercises his/her leadership to reach at the targeted vision and mission taking his followers/subordinates/people into confidence in proper mood and mode then his/her leadership(s) merits to be counted and weighed as leadership in natural form. Conversely, when such leadership(s) attaches priority to self/vested interests disregarding the targeting vision and mission then s/he definitely takes resorts to deviations, which must be treated as perversions leading to perverted form of leadership.

Such perverted form of leadership pointedly in politics and statecraft may be equated with capitalization in economics. For the reason that in economics, certainly in a broader sense, capitalization means using something as capital to earn/gain/enhance more. And one who capitalizes [money, reputation etc.) is called capitalizer and such act of capitalization by the capitalizer is titled ‘Capitalizership’.

Likewise, in politics and statecraft, such capitilizership ascends when one/leader(s) capitalizes people’s supports either through election or otherwise for attaining his/her gains at the disregard/negligence of common interests/gains which s/he is committed to do necessarily. And so, in line with the perverted forms of government here ‘capitalizership’ may rightly be branded as ‘perverted form of leadership’. Let us see how capitalizership(s) under the mask of leadership(s) are moving fast in today’s world. Let political scientists, thinkers, observers and social think-tanks feel free to welcome this newly coined taxonomy to understand the real theme of leadership(s) in today’s perspectives as well. This notion may also be used in other relevant areas. Drawing here careful attention also to the fact that ‘any practice of this word as perverted form of leadership henceforward should bear reference to this article as it upholds the memo of intellectual property’.

Perversions: Case of Leadership, statesmanship and politics

[Published in Bogota Free Planet, South America, on 2 August 2015 and on 27 August 2016 in Dhaka Courier, Bangladesh]

Let me at the start make it clear that this very write-up is a lean-to with a diversity and dimension of the article ‘Capitalizership: Also as perverted form of Leadership’ published in Dhaka Courier, Bangladesh on 11 August 2016. Markedly it needs to be noted too with due care and candor that I first I uttered this during a talk-show on Tritiomatra, the leading Talk-show program (of Chanel-I) in Bangladesh, on 01 August 2016 followed by its publication as well. Instantly before and after, hundreds of positive responses from think-tanks, political scientists, activists and leaders of various shades and backgrounds at home and abroad supporting the very concept started coming in and the process is on in full swing. All these encouraged me to go further to invest efforts in case of other relevant concepts in politics and political science such as statesmanship and politics, which are organically tied to leadership indeed.

Therefore, as an overhauling mood and mode asking at the beginning are there any perverted forms/ugly cover-ups of the lexicons ‘Leadership’, Statesmanship and Politics? It may at the outset sound a little problematic or beside the point in its entirety but its standing and necessity can hardly be gainsaid in conclusion. For analytical purposes, focus on the one may conclusively reveal the overall standing of others as a whole. From such standpoints, focus on leadership may be chosen as a priori. On all counts, veracity unfolds that the practice of leadership(s) from the very days of civilizations till date on earth under countless circumstances, conforming or not, is indeed mostly not in tune with its very spirit and vein. Caprices, disregards, connivances, deviations and so forth are on in full swing for which real taste and smell of leadership(s) aimed at the well-being of people/organization is a recurring asking for all. One may readily jump to a conclusion that such phenomenon of leadership(s) amounts to perversion of leadership(s). Therefore, arises a pertinent query what should be the befitting taxonomy for branding such perversion of leadership(s)? Of course, there is nothing to be worried at all, although attempts are on to suit the very purpose. Yes, in social sciences and in particular in politics and political science, we meet with various forms of government having analogous terminologies (antonyms) for perversions therein.

Till date, history carries record that It was Aristotle who in his epoch-making book ‘Politics’ written nearly 2500 years ago, presented three forms of government depending on numerical standing showing at the same time their perverted forms. In natural form, they are called Monarchy/Dictatorship Rule of One. Here the dictator with the profoundest sense of dedication and responsibility, works as a whole for the well-being of the people, Aristocracy i.e. Rule of Few. Here the few with the profoundest sense of dedication and responsibility, work as a whole for the well-being of the people and Polity i.e. Rule of Many. Here the Many with the profoundest sense of dedication and responsibility, work as a whole for the well-being of the people. In perverted form they are named Tyranny, Plutocracy and Democracy. Differences between natural form and perverted form imply that in the former interests and well-fare of the people are primarily ensured, defended and protected while in the latter form interests and welfare of those who wield power are essentially ensured, defended and protected.

And applying this very understanding, logic and formula of the forms of government set by Aristotle, there no denying the fact that Leadership(s) can as well be tasted and understood in a perverted mood and mode in today’s perspectives. In simple terms Leadership denotes art/practice of guiding group/people or organization. When a leader exercises his/her leadership to reach at the targeted vision and mission taking his followers/subordinates/people into confidence in proper mood and mode then his/her leadership(s) merits to be counted and weighed as leadership in natural form. Conversely, when such leadership(s) attaches priority to self/vested interests disregarding the targeting vision and mission then s/he definitely takes resorts to deviations, which must be treated as perversions leading to ‘perverted form of leadership’. And it is also true that political scientists, sociologists, political analysts and thinkers of various shades, colors and backgrounds stretching from East to West to North to South have been on for a long to devise/coin a seemly lingo of leadership. Even political activists, past and/or presents, are not far away from such pursuits. Lexes such as bad leadership, corrupt leadership, deviated leadership, selfish leadership, ill-leadership etc. came into lights but none of them meaningfully represent the perversion of leadership in positive manner.  

Consequently, at this moment, it is almost a kind of profound satisfaction and relaxation for us all that we are certainly in a position to reach at the coveted goal/station. Yes, such perverted form of leadership pointedly in politics and statecraft may be equated with capitalization in economics. For the reason that in economics, certainly in a broader sense, capitalization means using something as capital to earn/gain/enhance more. And one who capitalizes [money, reputation etc.) is called capitalizer and such act of capitalization by the capitalizer is titled ‘Capitalizership’.

Alike, in politics and statecraft, such capitilizership ascends when one/leader(s) capitalizes people’s supports either through election or otherwise for attaining his/her gains at the disregard/negligence of common interests/gains, which s/he is committed to do necessarily. And so, in line with the perverted forms of government here ‘capitalizership’ may rightly be branded as ‘perverted form of leadership’. Let us see how capitalizership(s) under the mask of leadership(s) are moving fast in today’s world. Let political scientists, thinkers, observers and social think-tanks feel free to welcome this newly coined taxonomy to understand the real theme of leadership(s) in today’s perspectives as well. This notion may also be used in other relevant areas.

By the same token in the end, questions crop up readily, what are about Statesmanship and Politics? Convincingly enough, yes, these two areas are not away from the blasts of pervasions and that’s why the jargon ‘Steasmeanship’(being used for the first time) can be applied as perverted form of ‘statesmanship’ while for ‘Politics’ such lexis is ‘Politrics’(mostly a known vocabulary), granting the nature of statesmanship and politics fluctuate depending on time, space and dimension. Let political scientists, thinkers, observers and social think-tanks feel free to welcome these newly coined expressions to understand the real theme of leadership(s), statesmanship(s) and politics in today’s perspectives as well. These notions may also be used in other relevant areas.

Needless here to repeat that ‘any practice of these words as perverted form of leadership, statesmanship and politics henceforward should bear reference to this article as it upholds the memo of intellectual property’.

Japan: Staging a comeback?

[This very article is the extension of the article under the same title published on 4 June in Bogota Free Planet and Columbia Fox and on June 10 Bogota Free Planet Newspaper Online, South America, on 9 June in Dhaka Courier and on 10 June 2016 in Green Watch Dhaka, Bangladesh]

History repeats itself truth it is but truer is that ‘not in same line and tune with the past’. No coming back/reappearance, whether it is comfortable or not, is free from deductions, additions, readjustments, accommodations and compulsions arising necessarily from time, space and dimension. Human characters are so diverse, peculiar and opaque those tend us to draw a deduction/induction as well ‘Right or wrong cannot be defined and determined sans cause and effect mostly rooted in the past.’ History bears testimony ‘Had there been no Treaty of Versailles signed on 28 June 1919 ending war between Germany and Allied Powers, there could probably have no Adolf Hitler’. Every so often even an issue such as existence of a big neighbor having matching a gesture and exposure may give birth to a sense of serious insecurity to a neighbor, big or small. Under such compelling circumstances, such neighbor(s) at times finds no option but to go for coining, strengthening, consolidating and safeguarding self-defense designs and implementation, collective or not. If the state carries a legacy of imperial power colored with war-atrocities and annihilation at large and again stands powerful economically and technologically then what next awaits her. Today’s Japan is extremely faced with this very reality in the overall contests of national, regional and global landscapes. This very article is the extension of the article under the same title

Japan, leading pre-second world war thespian but post-second world war impotent power, is staging a come-back in the political firmaments of Asia with all its tastes, colors, velocity and comprehensiveness. Japan, an island nation in the Pacific Ocean in East Asia, aslo termed as a trading nation, is currently holding the standing and status of world third economic power even having negligible natural resources. Japanese post-war economic miracle is a myth indeed. The economy of Japan is the third largest in the world by nominal GDP, the fourth largest by purchasing power parity and is the world's second largest developed economy. According to the International Monetary Fund, the country's per capita GDP (PPP) was at $36,899, the 22nd-highest in 2013.

Also truth is that she is lagging behind from defense perspectives. Question is should Japan at this time as well is ready for her sway over such security issues”. Can economically developed but militarily weak Japan play befitting role in today’s context? Not at all. If so, does SDF (Self-defense Forces) law in 1954 contradict article 9 in the constitution of Japan? Answer unfurls the actuality whether SDF is wall or not depends upon the overall interpretations of article 9 in the constitution in the light of overall threats, security, opportunities, options and dilemmas emanating from bi-lateral, regional and global landscapes, present and/or future. Keeping in mind the conflicting stands of pacifists, mercantilist, normalists and nationalists here the simplest asking is who shall decide it? Is it Parliament(Article 96 of the Constitution provides that an amendment to the Constitution can only be made by a two-thirds affirmative vote in both houses of the Diet and with ratification by a majority of the electorate) or the Supreme Court?

Shinzo Abe administration under the ray of Abe doctrine, unlike Yoshida Doctrine (1951) named after Prime Minister Yoshida, Fukuda Doctrine (1977) following the name of Prime Minister Fukuda and Koizumi Doctrine (christened by the premier’s aides, was based on Koizumi Junichiro’s January 14, 2002 speech in Singapore) originated from the name of Prime Minister Koizumi Junchiro, contends that, as article 9, paragraph 1 does not repudiate the state’s inherent right of self-defense, generating standing forces for the purpose of self-defense does not create the “war potential” barred by  paragraph 2 of article 9.  Abe doctrine explains “war potential” as forces much greater than those forces marginally required for self-defense. So, the SDF is not “war” potential, but “self-defense” potential.  Such an interpretation did not appear meteorically.  This owes to a wide-ranging history for the government’s interpretation in line with nationalistic spirit and profound emotions speaking and heralding of ‘Japan dream’.

At the backdrop of the US–Japan Mutual Defense Assistance Agreement (MSA Agreement), which was contracted on March 8, 1954, and entered into force on May 1, 1954, no option was left for Japan but to strengthen its defense capabilities. To meet with it, SDF law was passed in 1954. At a Budget Committee meeting on December 21, 1954, the Cabinet answered that the SDF was outside the scope of the “war potential” referenced in article 9, paragraph 2 of the Constitution, because the right of self-defense was not prohibited by article 9.  Possession of the necessary force to defend Japan was therefore not prohibited by the Constitution. The next day, at the same committee meeting, the Cabinet expressed its official interpretation of the Constitution as follows:

The Constitution did not deny the self-defense right; Japan renounced war, but did not renounce the right to struggle in order to defend itself;

Establishment of the SDF is not against the Constitution because SDF’s mission is self-defense and its ability is limited to necessary and adequate levels of self-defense.

Although the government was able to establish the SDF, Japan’s right of self-defense is limited because of the constitutional restriction.  The government stated in 1954 that there are three requirements that must be met in order to use the right of self-defense: (1) there is a present and wrongful danger of invasion to Japan; (2) no other appropriate measures exist to defend Japan; and (3) the use of force to defend Japan is limited to the extent only minimally necessary. Therefore, Japan adopted an exclusively defense-oriented policy.  The Cabinet has changed its members frequently, but has not changed its interpretation of article 9 with regard to the right of self-defense.

Interestingly enough, SDF is being strengthened gradually under the caps of more and more new provisions and necessities engulfing emphatically PKO Law in 1992, the Law Concerning Cooperation for United Nations Peacekeeping Operations and Other Operations (PKO Law), which enabled the dispatch of the SDF overseas, Guidelines and Law Concerning Situations in Areas Surrounding Japan, Antiterrorism Special Measures Law, Three War-Contingency Laws in 2003, Iraq Special Measures Law,  Seven Contingency Laws in 2004 and later setting up of National Security Council. She struck security pacts with Australia and India in 2007 and 2008. Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force (JMSDF) is a regular participant in RIMPAC, the Rim of the Pacific Exercise, is the world's largest international maritime warfare exercise. US-Japan military alliance is still a cornerstone of Japan’s foreign policy. One of the G4 nations seeking permanent membership in the UN Security Council, Japan has territorial disputes with Russia, South Korea, China and North Korea and recent Chinese defense exercises in the Pacific and Indian Oceans has furthered Japan’s logic to stand militarily for defensive purposes. The cabinet of Japan’s Prime Minister Shinzo Abe approved a record 5.05 trillion yen ($41.4 billion) defense budget for fiscal year 2016/2017 and slightly below the 5.09 trillion yen requested by Japan’s Ministry of Defense (MOD), The Japan Times reports. This marks the fourth consecutive rise in defense spending since Shinzo Abe assumed office in December 2012(http://thediplomat.com/2015/12/japan-approves-record-defense-budget/).

Kyle Mizokami, USNI News contributor wrote “Politically, Abe’s security agenda is designed to get Japan more involved in the world, and more capable of being a partner operating with the United States,”

“Japan’s de facto military, the Self-Defense Forces, would be able to reciprocate American efforts to defend Japan. Abe is also concentrating on increasing SDF interoperability with U.S. forces.”

(https://news.usni.org/2015/12/24/cabinet-approves-record-42-1-billion-2016-japanese-defense-budget

US accept as true that 21^st century belongs to Asia and strategic importance of Indian Ocean is beyond question. Containment of China is further concern since she is moving very fast economically and militarily with Silk Road, string of pearls and China Dream as ‘ignited ethos’ making geo-politics convoluted. Moreover, China’s new approaches to its foreign policy to stand by those who are in need referring in particular the neighbors both ideologically and geographically are clear indications of her re-thought on the past limitations and closed-door policy. It is China that raises head meaningfully in the uni-polar world led by USA. Therefore, concerted efforts against communist China are unavoidable and here Japan’s role is big one. But Japan under article 9 is not matching at all. Rather strong Japan is the only answer and option. And irony of the fate unfolds USA now understand it more pragmatically and mathematically than anybody else.

Japanese leaders and statesmen of diverse backgrounds, natures and dimensions remained water-tight, confused and bewildered for a long since so many minds and intelligences generated so many opinions and options mostly also divergent in nature and approach. Even some hastened to take it to the Supreme Court as well. Curiously enough, Unlike the Supreme Court of Bangladesh, here Supreme Court of Japan was restrained enough to deal with such hottest politico-constitutional issue. Supreme Court did not slip to identify the line of demarcation between political domain and judicial domain. It asserted, affirmed and confirmed that ‘political matter(s) should be handled politically by people’s representatives, Diet, since it is their domain’. In doing so, Supreme Court has taken resort to many doctrines such as ‘state governance’, ‘political domain’ and so on. The state governance theory was chosen and developed among Japanese scholars under the postwar Constitution by referring to the French acte de gouvernement, German Regierungsakt, and United States political-question theory, which prefer and refer to the political branches of government (the executive and legislative branches) for the resolution of certain disputes.

Stands of the Supreme Court of Japan about the interpretation, interpreter and standing of article 9 and SDF in the ongoing constitution advanced and are still advancing a reality of Japan’s staging a come-back more sharply and evocatively. It gives the impression that the Japanese people would like to secure and ensure Japan’s security upholding the messages of the SDF and the Japan-US security agreements whether or not there is a constitutional problem. Should not Diet come forward to do what is needed for Japan of today and tomorrow?

Intent on revamping Japan's post-World War II foreign and defence policy, Abe, in his In his state of union address to the Japanese parliament (Diet) on 12 February 2015, called for the revision of the Japanese pacifist constitution, which bars the Asian powerhouse from developing a standing army and an offensive military posture.

Abe has described the amendment of Japan's highest legal document, imposed under US occupation, as the "biggest reform since the end of the war".

In an impassioned address before Japanese parliamentarians, Abe called upon his compatriots to revisit their deeply pacifist instincts, a legacy of World War II, and reimagine a more globally proactive Japan.

In his most emotional speech yet, Abe declared: "People of Japan, be confident... Isn't it time to hold deep debate about revising the constitution? For the future of Japan, shouldn't we accomplish in this parliament the biggest reform since the end of the war?"

So far, there is restricted signal that he will be able to secure the two-thirds majorities in both the upper and lower houses of the Japanese parliament to amend war-renouncing provisions (ie, Article 9) of the constitution. Strategic parliamentary allies such as the New Komeito party, as well as certain members of the ruling Liberal Democratic Party, have continuously opposed any overt revision of the constitution. There is no denying the fact that today or tomorrow Japan shall be in a position to win the most coveted parliamentary play since she is also fighting for increasing permanent seats in the UN Security Council so that she shall have a one without fail. On all counts, one should recall from pragmatic standpoints that this Japan is not standing now on the very classical definitions and interpretations of Article 9 of her Constitution. She has to be sure deviated and advanced a lot. Hardly there is any black hole in her dream in this regard.

Pursuing asking is what type of Japan is emerging as a rejuvenated power? Definitely it will not be the recurrence of the past one. World would like to see a Japan full of potency, democratic wheels, optimism and encouraging nous of creations and roles coupled with broad-based vision of strengthening the multi-facets baskets of ODA(It is the world's fifth largest donor donating US$9.2 billion in 2014). Japan having a pro-active mood and mode of neighborhood and cooperation, mutual and/or collective, has, speaking in the superlatives, every opportunity and leap forward to stand by Asia in particular to radiate and pass her brilliance, genius and  flavor under the circumstances, compelling or not. Let Abe doctrine under his kinetic, visionary and overhauling leadership act to suit the very purpose in this widely known ‘Land of Rising Sun’.

In conclusion, Japan is a very good and trustworthy friend of Bangladesh. Her overall cooperation in our development sectors from 1972 down to present time need not to be exaggerated. Let Bangladesh-Japan friendship be a model even in the days ahead of.

[Dr. Sinha MA Sayeed, Chairman of Leadership Studies Foundation, writer and columnist, Bangladesh. He can be reached at: sinha_sayeed611@yahoo.com]

Dr. Sinha M.A. Sayeed

Netted BSS (Honors), MSS in Political Science with a degree of subsidiary in Sociology and Public Administration, LLB, LLM, PhD

[Titled ‘global voice’ for the book ‘O United Nations’]

Founder & Chairman, Leadership Studies Foundation, LSF

Member, International Political Science Association (IPSA)

Life member, Bangladesh Red Crescent Society

Associated with a number of social, cultural and research organizations of national and international standard and altitude

Columnist, writer and contributor: National and International  Dailies and Weeklies including  The Herald, Weekly Times, Asian News, African Herald Express, Burma Times, Asia Monitor, Bogota Free Planet, Daily Star, Financial Express, Independent, New Nation, Daily Sun, Daily Observer, Green Watch Dhaka, Dhaka Courier, PROBE and so on.

Publications so far engulf five books in English jacketing as well the books ‘O United Nations’, ‘For A President Who Can Taka An Initiative’ published by Bangladesh Political Science Association, one book in Bengali ‘Samoyer Kabita (Poems at the call of time) published by Bangladesh Writers’ Foundation and more than two hundred articles came out in various national and international dailies, weeklies and academic journals.

More noteworthy is that for the epoch-making book ‘O United Nations’ written in a prose-poetry form, first of its kind in the history of United Nations since its birth on 24 October 1945, has been honored with a rare title 'Global Voice' from Bangladesh Philosophical Association (BPA), India Foreign Policy Research Centre, New Delhi, and Bogota Free Planet (BFP), a leading Online Daily in South America. It has as well been echoed and seconded by the bodies such as International Association of Historians of Asia, World Federation of United Nations Associations, International Political Science Association and Yale Model United Nations XXXV, Yale University, USA, Centre for Nepal and Asian Studies and so on.

The book has so far brought seven ‘awards and recognitions’ from home and abroad.

The extended form of the book is now available at www.sinha-ounitednations.com. Dorrance Publishing House, one of the largest and oldest Publishing Houses in USA, has meanwhile reviewed the book and expressed its desire to publish in the final form internationally and the matter is at the final stage of striking a contract accordingly.

Books coming out shortly:

Foreign policy: Bangladesh perspective

National consensus: Polemics or Reality: A case of Bangladesh

Politics: Time, Space and Dimension (A compilations of the 200 articles published so far).

Distinguished Speaker, outstandingly among others, at Civil Academies/Institutions:

Bangladesh Public Administration Training Centre, BAPATC, Ministry of Public Administration           

National Academy for Planning and Development, NAPD, Ministry of Planning

Center for Environmental and Geographic Information Services, CEGIS, Ministry of Water Resources

National Institute of Mass Communication (NIMC), Ministry of Information

Scores of Leading private organizations, bodies and associations entailing universities as well

Police Academies/Institutions:

Police Staff College Bangladesh, PSCB, Ministry of Home Affairs

Bangladesh Police Academy (BPA), Sarda, Ministry of Home Affairs

Defense Academies/Institutions

Artillery Center & School, Bangladesh Army, Halishahor, Chittagong, Ministry of Defense

Naval Academy, Bangladesh Navy, Chittagong, Ministry of Defense

Also teaching at Universities, public and private

Areas of interests involve Ethics and morality, communications, good governance, leadership, superior-subordinate relations, formal and informal approaches, Intelligence Agencies, foreign policy, diplomacy, regional cooperation, international politics and relations, peace and conflicts and on any topics of social sciences in particular.

Regular participant in talk-shows on TV Channels including ATN Bangla, RTV, NTV, Channel-I, Independent Television, Masranga and so on.

Former journalist: ENA, New Nation (1978-1981)

Former News reader (English): Radio Bangladesh both external and internal services (1983-1986)

Former President, Board of Editors of Voice and Vision, a Fortnightly Radio Magazine (1984-1986)

Nationally awarded speaker and debater for five consecutive times wrapping 1978-1982 for which Dhaka University honored with ‘Blazer’, the highest recognition in this field, and till the date such rectitude has not been challenged by anybody.

A widely travelled person, he has visited more than fifty countries in various capacities and protocols entailing USA, USSR, UK, France, China, Canada, South Africa and Brazil.

Present non-political standing:

With more than twenty five years of active, honest, transparent and colorful background in politics, starting from student to youth to national hemispheres, finally left politics in 1998 resigning from the office of the Secretary for Publicity & Publications of the central working committee of Jatio Party. Prior to that from 1986 to 1997 held the office of the Secretary for International Affairs.

Japan: Staging a comeback?

[This very article is the extension of the article under the same title published on 4 June in Bogota Free Planet and Columbia Fox and on June 10 Bogota Free Planet Newspaper Online, South America, on 9 June in Dhaka Courier and on 10 June 2016 in Green Watch Dhaka, Bangladesh]

History repeats itself truth it is but truer is that ‘not in same line and tune with the past’. No coming back/reappearance, whether it is comfortable or not, is free from deductions, additions, readjustments, accommodations and compulsions arising necessarily from time, space and dimension. Human characters are so diverse, peculiar and opaque those tend us to draw a deduction/induction as well ‘Right or wrong cannot be defined and determined sans cause and effect mostly rooted in the past.’ History bears testimony ‘Had there been no Treaty of Versailles signed on 28 June 1919 ending war between Germany and Allied Powers, there could probably have no Adolf Hitler’. Every so often even an issue such as existence of a big neighbor having matching a gesture and exposure may give birth to a sense of serious insecurity to a neighbor, big or small. Under such compelling circumstances, such neighbor(s) at times finds no option but to go for coining, strengthening, consolidating and safeguarding self-defense designs and implementation, collective or not. If the state carries a legacy of imperial power colored with war-atrocities and annihilation at large and again stands powerful economically and technologically then what next awaits her. Today’s Japan is extremely faced with this very reality in the overall contests of national, regional and global landscapes. This very article is the extension of the article under the same title

Japan, leading pre-second world war thespian but post-second world war impotent power, is staging a come-back in the political firmaments of Asia with all its tastes, colors, velocity and comprehensiveness. Japan, an island nation in the Pacific Ocean in East Asia, aslo termed as a trading nation, is currently holding the standing and status of world third economic power even having negligible natural resources. Japanese post-war economic miracle is a myth indeed. The economy of Japan is the third largest in the world by nominal GDP, the fourth largest by purchasing power parity and is the world's second largest developed economy. According to the International Monetary Fund, the country's per capita GDP (PPP) was at $36,899, the 22nd-highest in 2013.

Also truth is that she is lagging behind from defense perspectives. Question is should Japan at this time as well is ready for her sway over such security issues”. Can economically developed but militarily weak Japan play befitting role in today’s context? Not at all. If so, does SDF (Self-defense Forces) law in 1954 contradict article 9 in the constitution of Japan? Answer unfurls the actuality whether SDF is wall or not depends upon the overall interpretations of article 9 in the constitution in the light of overall threats, security, opportunities, options and dilemmas emanating from bi-lateral, regional and global landscapes, present and/or future. Keeping in mind the conflicting stands of pacifists, mercantilist, normalists and nationalists here the simplest asking is who shall decide it? Is it Parliament(Article 96 of the Constitution provides that an amendment to the Constitution can only be made by a two-thirds affirmative vote in both houses of the Diet and with ratification by a majority of the electorate) or the Supreme Court?

Shinzo Abe administration under the ray of Abe doctrine, unlike Yoshida Doctrine (1951) named after Prime Minister Yoshida, Fukuda Doctrine (1977) following the name of Prime Minister Fukuda and Koizumi Doctrine (christened by the premier’s aides, was based on Koizumi Junichiro’s January 14, 2002 speech in Singapore) originated from the name of Prime Minister Koizumi Junchiro, contends that, as article 9, paragraph 1 does not repudiate the state’s inherent right of self-defense, generating standing forces for the purpose of self-defense does not create the “war potential” barred by  paragraph 2 of article 9.  Abe doctrine explains “war potential” as forces much greater than those forces marginally required for self-defense. So, the SDF is not “war” potential, but “self-defense” potential.  Such an interpretation did not appear meteorically.  This owes to a wide-ranging history for the government’s interpretation in line with nationalistic spirit and profound emotions speaking and heralding of ‘Japan dream’.

At the backdrop of the US–Japan Mutual Defense Assistance Agreement (MSA Agreement), which was contracted on March 8, 1954, and entered into force on May 1, 1954, no option was left for Japan but to strengthen its defense capabilities. To meet with it, SDF law was passed in 1954. At a Budget Committee meeting on December 21, 1954, the Cabinet answered that the SDF was outside the scope of the “war potential” referenced in article 9, paragraph 2 of the Constitution, because the right of self-defense was not prohibited by article 9.  Possession of the necessary force to defend Japan was therefore not prohibited by the Constitution. The next day, at the same committee meeting, the Cabinet expressed its official interpretation of the Constitution as follows:

The Constitution did not deny the self-defense right; Japan renounced war, but did not renounce the right to struggle in order to defend itself;

Establishment of the SDF is not against the Constitution because SDF’s mission is self-defense and its ability is limited to necessary and adequate levels of self-defense.

Although the government was able to establish the SDF, Japan’s right of self-defense is limited because of the constitutional restriction.  The government stated in 1954 that there are three requirements that must be met in order to use the right of self-defense: (1) there is a present and wrongful danger of invasion to Japan; (2) no other appropriate measures exist to defend Japan; and (3) the use of force to defend Japan is limited to the extent only minimally necessary. Therefore, Japan adopted an exclusively defense-oriented policy.  The Cabinet has changed its members frequently, but has not changed its interpretation of article 9 with regard to the right of self-defense.

Interestingly enough, SDF is being strengthened gradually under the caps of more and more new provisions and necessities engulfing emphatically PKO Law in 1992, the Law Concerning Cooperation for United Nations Peacekeeping Operations and Other Operations (PKO Law), which enabled the dispatch of the SDF overseas, Guidelines and Law Concerning Situations in Areas Surrounding Japan, Antiterrorism Special Measures Law, Three War-Contingency Laws in 2003, Iraq Special Measures Law,  Seven Contingency Laws in 2004 and later setting up of National Security Council. She struck security pacts with Australia and India in 2007 and 2008. Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force (JMSDF) is a regular participant in RIMPAC, the Rim of the Pacific Exercise, is the world's largest international maritime warfare exercise. US-Japan military alliance is still a cornerstone of Japan’s foreign policy. One of the G4 nations seeking permanent membership in the UN Security Council, Japan has territorial disputes with Russia, South Korea, China and North Korea and recent Chinese defense exercises in the Pacific and Indian Oceans has furthered Japan’s logic to stand militarily for defensive purposes. The cabinet of Japan’s Prime Minister Shinzo Abe approved a record 5.05 trillion yen ($41.4 billion) defense budget for fiscal year 2016/2017 and slightly below the 5.09 trillion yen requested by Japan’s Ministry of Defense (MOD), The Japan Times reports. This marks the fourth consecutive rise in defense spending since Shinzo Abe assumed office in December 2012(http://thediplomat.com/2015/12/japan-approves-record-defense-budget/).

Kyle Mizokami, USNI News contributor wrote “Politically, Abe’s security agenda is designed to get Japan more involved in the world, and more capable of being a partner operating with the United States,”

“Japan’s de facto military, the Self-Defense Forces, would be able to reciprocate American efforts to defend Japan. Abe is also concentrating on increasing SDF interoperability with U.S. forces.”

(https://news.usni.org/2015/12/24/cabinet-approves-record-42-1-billion-2016-japanese-defense-budget

US accept as true that 21^st century belongs to Asia and strategic importance of Indian Ocean is beyond question. Containment of China is further concern since she is moving very fast economically and militarily with Silk Road, string of pearls and China Dream as ‘ignited ethos’ making geo-politics convoluted. Moreover, China’s new approaches to its foreign policy to stand by those who are in need referring in particular the neighbors both ideologically and geographically are clear indications of her re-thought on the past limitations and closed-door policy. It is China that raises head meaningfully in the uni-polar world led by USA. Therefore, concerted efforts against communist China are unavoidable and here Japan’s role is big one. But Japan under article 9 is not matching at all. Rather strong Japan is the only answer and option. And irony of the fate unfolds USA now understand it more pragmatically and mathematically than anybody else.

Japanese leaders and statesmen of diverse backgrounds, natures and dimensions remained water-tight, confused and bewildered for a long since so many minds and intelligences generated so many opinions and options mostly also divergent in nature and approach. Even some hastened to take it to the Supreme Court as well. Curiously enough, Unlike the Supreme Court of Bangladesh, here Supreme Court of Japan was restrained enough to deal with such hottest politico-constitutional issue. Supreme Court did not slip to identify the line of demarcation between political domain and judicial domain. It asserted, affirmed and confirmed that ‘political matter(s) should be handled politically by people’s representatives, Diet, since it is their domain’. In doing so, Supreme Court has taken resort to many doctrines such as ‘state governance’, ‘political domain’ and so on. The state governance theory was chosen and developed among Japanese scholars under the postwar Constitution by referring to the French acte de gouvernement, German Regierungsakt, and United States political-question theory, which prefer and refer to the political branches of government (the executive and legislative branches) for the resolution of certain disputes.

Stands of the Supreme Court of Japan about the interpretation, interpreter and standing of article 9 and SDF in the ongoing constitution advanced and are still advancing a reality of Japan’s staging a come-back more sharply and evocatively. It gives the impression that the Japanese people would like to secure and ensure Japan’s security upholding the messages of the SDF and the Japan-US security agreements whether or not there is a constitutional problem. Should not Diet come forward to do what is needed for Japan of today and tomorrow?

Intent on revamping Japan's post-World War II foreign and defence policy, Abe, in his In his state of union address to the Japanese parliament (Diet) on 12 February 2015, called for the revision of the Japanese pacifist constitution, which bars the Asian powerhouse from developing a standing army and an offensive military posture.

Abe has described the amendment of Japan's highest legal document, imposed under US occupation, as the "biggest reform since the end of the war".

In an impassioned address before Japanese parliamentarians, Abe called upon his compatriots to revisit their deeply pacifist instincts, a legacy of World War II, and reimagine a more globally proactive Japan.

In his most emotional speech yet, Abe declared: "People of Japan, be confident... Isn't it time to hold deep debate about revising the constitution? For the future of Japan, shouldn't we accomplish in this parliament the biggest reform since the end of the war?"

So far, there is restricted signal that he will be able to secure the two-thirds majorities in both the upper and lower houses of the Japanese parliament to amend war-renouncing provisions (ie, Article 9) of the constitution. Strategic parliamentary allies such as the New Komeito party, as well as certain members of the ruling Liberal Democratic Party, have continuously opposed any overt revision of the constitution. There is no denying the fact that today or tomorrow Japan shall be in a position to win the most coveted parliamentary play since she is also fighting for increasing permanent seats in the UN Security Council so that she shall have a one without fail. On all counts, one should recall from pragmatic standpoints that this Japan is not standing now on the very classical definitions and interpretations of Article 9 of her Constitution. She has to be sure deviated and advanced a lot. Hardly there is any black hole in her dream in this regard.

Pursuing asking is what type of Japan is emerging as a rejuvenated power? Definitely it will not be the recurrence of the past one. World would like to see a Japan full of potency, democratic wheels, optimism and encouraging nous of creations and roles coupled with broad-based vision of strengthening the multi-facets baskets of ODA(It is the world's fifth largest donor donating US$9.2 billion in 2014). Japan having a pro-active mood and mode of neighborhood and cooperation, mutual and/or collective, has, speaking in the superlatives, every opportunity and leap forward to stand by Asia in particular to radiate and pass her brilliance, genius and  flavor under the circumstances, compelling or not. Let Abe doctrine under his kinetic, visionary and overhauling leadership act to suit the very purpose in this widely known ‘Land of Rising Sun’.

In conclusion, Japan is a very good and trustworthy friend of Bangladesh. Her overall cooperation in our development sectors from 1972 down to present time need not to be exaggerated. Let Bangladesh-Japan friendship be a model even in the days ahead of.

[Dr. Sinha MA Sayeed, Chairman of Leadership Studies Foundation, writer and columnist, Bangladesh. He can be reached at sinha_sayeed611@yahoo.com].

Good governance in 21st century

[This was published in Dhaka Courier on 21 October, in BOGOTA FREE PLANET and in GREEN WATCH 20 October 2015]

‘Good governance” is a term that has become a part of the lingo of a bulky range of institutions, development or else, and other actors within the cupolas of local, national, regional and international magnitudes, although what it means unerringly, however, has not so well been accepted and established. Even though, the outcome document of 2011 Busan High-Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness as well reflects these commitments. In a well-cited appraisal, past UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan strongly voiced that “good governance is perhaps the single most important factor in eradicating poverty and promoting development”. IMF, World Bank and UN defined ‘good governance’ from their respective standpoints setting conceivable parameters, achievable or not, and so are the cases in case of EU states. More oscillations, edginess and eccentricities are discernable at/within the flows and fashions of such understanding in developing states.

International Monetary Fund(IFM)According to the UN, good governance symbolizes consensus orientation, rule of law, participatory mood and mode with a sustainable democratic order, accountability, effectiveness and efficiency, transparency, responsibility and responsiveness, equitability and Inclusiveness. The International Monetary Fund (IFM) affirmed in 1996 that "promoting good governance in all its aspects, including by ensuring the rule of law, improving the efficiency and accountability of the public sector, and tackling corruption, as essential elements of a framework within which economies can prosper. The IMF feels that corruption within economies is caused by the ineffective governance of the economy, either too much regulation or too little regulation. To receive loans from the IMF, countries must have certain good governance policies, as determined by the IMF, in place. The World Bank seems to be more concerned with the reform of economic and social resource control. In 1992, it underlined three aspects of society which they feel affect the nature of a country's governance: type of political regime; process by which authority is exercised in the management of the economic and social resources, in order to development; and capacity of governments to formulate policies and have them effectively implemented. Thus the conceptual ambiguities, priorities and over-generalization are still hunting it.

Political scientist John Gerring in a 1999 article spelled out eight “criteria of conceptual goodness” that provide a useful framework. Four of these criteria are especially relevant here for our purposes:

First, “good governance” lacks parsimony. Unlike good concepts, good governance has endless definitions, and we always need the details of each to understand if we are talking about the same thing.

Second, “good governance” lacks differentiation. Well-governed countries often sound a lot like functioning liberal democracies, for instance, and it is not clear how they differ.

Third, “good governance” lacks coherence. Its many possible characteristics — from respect for human rights to efficient banking regulations — do not clearly belong together.

Fourth, and most important, “good governance” lacks theoretical utility. It confuses, rather than aids, in the formulation of theory and the related project of hypothesis testing therefore, determination of good governance in the light of certain standards and criteria may not be effective in reality.

Close studies show that the concept ‘good governance’ is a blend of two terms, one is good and other being governance. Speaking superlatively, here the term ‘governance’ is illuminated having an adjective ‘good’ before it and that’s why let us, first of all, be clear what does governance imply and what criteria(s) do make a governance a good governance?

Governance is "the process of decision-making and the process by which decisions are implemented (or not implemented)".Therefore, the term ‘governance’, irrespective of  the nature or scale  exists and continues in any administration, public or private, starting from families engulfing institutions of local, national, regional and international magnitudes.

Whenever one talks of ‘good governance’, it simply denotes a kind of comparisons between or among effective and less effective governance(s) from the perspectives of  running an administration to achieve the goals within the period(s) stipulated or not. From such comparative studies and focuses emerge reasons for one’s moving forward and other(s) lagging behind and recommendations therein to be put into practice depending on time, space and dimension. Hence, the concept of good governance often emerges as a model to compare ineffective/less ineffective economies or political bodies with viable economies and political bodies. Point to be noted that good governance is about the processes for making and implementing decisions. It’s not about making ‘correct’ decisions, but about the best possible process for making those decisions.

In fact, good governance is an indeterminate term used in International development literature to describe how public institutions conduct public affairs and manage public resources. The concept, in the field of public administration, centers on the responsibility of governments and governing bodies to meet the needs of the masses as opposed to select groups in society. Because countries often described as "most successful" are Western liberal democratic states concentrated in Europe and the Americas and good governance standards often measure other state institutions against these states.

It is really a challenging initiative to frame a model for good governance since the overall circumstances and environs under which a state runs its administration cannot be equally applicable to another one. Not only this, there are lot of variations and diversities between a developed and developing state; even the notch of differences and actualities between two developed countries or two developing countries are also disparate. Despite all these, experts, theorists, model presenters etc. are spending time, money and energy at least to devise acceptable frame(s) containing a set of requirements that will be acting as a measuring rod as a whole.

   

Therefore, a whole, good governance stands for accountability, transparency, rule of law, responsiveness, equitability and inclusiveness, effectiveness and efficiency, non-cronyism, non-philistinism, non-corruption, participatory environment ensuring the four Ds (Development, De-bureaucratization, Delegation and Democratization), consensus orientation and strategic vision.

Interestingly enough rise and traipse of the concept new public administration added further impetus to good governance. Today, therefore, NMP with all its essentials, debatable or not, such as Change and Responsiveness, Client Centricity, Structural Changes in Administration, Multi-disciplinary Nature of Public Administration; and Politics-Administration Dichotomy in a lesser mood and mode has emerged  as the most vital component of good governance. The overall focus on NPA movement that started from the Minnow-Brooke Conference at USA in 1968 under the leadership of political scientist Dwgit Waldo having necessary relevance, values, social equity client focus and management-workers relations seems to be to make administration to be less "generic" and more "public", less "descriptive" and more "prescriptive", less "institution-oriented" and more "client-oriented", less "neutral" and more "normative" but should be no less scientific all the same.

Above all, the moot points of good governance are those who wield power sitting in the various seats of government. They are called civil servants since they are included in public administration through competitive examinations under Public Service Commission. They get matured, experienced, knowledgeable, informed and updated through various kinds of trainings and lessons at various stages of service(s) under the leadership of various training centers at home and abroad and the most leading one is Public Administration Training Centre, also called highest center of excellence. Mind-sets of such bodies of officers, civil servants, are condition precedent for making an administration a good administration, which is the other name of good governance. Here attention needs to be paid to the concept of ‘Bureaucracy’ but, to speak the truth, good governance coupled with new public administration hardly allow such stupidity as the word ‘cracy’ is very much negative in sense for the march and development of public administration facing the challenges of the 21s century.

Question crops up where is Bangladesh now standing? Reply is it is neither close to nor far away.  Let me affirm with a loud voice that Bangladesh Public Administration Training Centre (BPATC) under the able leadership of Rector AKM Abdul Awal Mujumdar has been moving onward in a positive mood and mode. Secretary for Public Administration Dr. Kamal Abdul Naser Chowdhury deserves to be praised for his overall watch-dog like leadership in the field of public administration. Therefore, for more, let Minister for Public Administration Syed Asraful Islam and pointedly Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina be more attentive to all the training centers including BPATC.