BDR Munity - Deeper Concerns continue to linger

The mutiny by BDR, also referred to as the Bangladeshi Rifles, on February 25 has left the country in a state of shock. A country accustomed to military coups had never before witnessed such violent disagreements within the country’s armed forces. After the emergence of Bangladesh, the East Pakistani Rifles were renamed as the Bangladeshi Rifles in 1972 and had been entrusted with the security of the national borders. The Bangladeshi Rifles were also required to supplement the army and police operations during national emergencies. The commanding officer of the BDR is deputed from the Bangladeshi Army thus depriving the former of any independent command structure. This subordination to the National Army and alleged mistreatment of the BDR personnel provoked the recent munity.

During the Annual Conference of the Bangladeshi Army and BDR at the latter’s Headquarters in Dhaka, the Bangladeshi Rifles mutinied by taking army personnel hostage inside the Durbar Hall at the Headquarters. A letter was apparently handed over to be delivered to media, detailing the grievances of the BDR. Issues of pay, working conditions and command structure have been cited as the apparent causes. According to an unnamed mutineer, “These army officers have been practically looting our resources for 200 years. It’s torture, mental torture, using the fear of losing our jobs”. There were unconfirmed reports of the munity spreading to other region and the BDR soldiers took control of the Goalkhali BDR camp with eight army officials inside. Services for the mobile phones were disrupted by the Government to prevent further spread of the munity. A 14 member team of the BDR had talks with P.M. Hasina leading to the easing of tensions. The promise of amnesty by the P.M. coupled with stern warning lead to the apparent end of the munity. The BDR personnel have laid down arms and released hostages.  

However, there are several unanswered questions and unaddressed concerns emerging from the munity which make an early settlement of the crisis doubtful. There are over 130 army personnel still missing, including the BDR Director General Major General Sakil Ahmed and his family. If a large number of these missing personnel are found to be dead will the Government still favor the amnesty proposal? The fact that many BDR soldiers attempted to escape when the army took control of the compound reflects that the Government’s promise of amnesty was not taken seriously.

Secondly, addressing the grievance of the BDR implies massive organizational restructuring of the Armed forces in the country. Given the Army’s disregard for democratic governments in Bangladesh, P.M. Hasina is unlikely to antagonize the Army by according to the BDR a co-equal status.

Thirdly, was the action of the BDR reflective of a general sense of discontent with the Bangladeshi Army? The political parties and the public have been critical of the army’s involvement in national politics. Complains of human rights violations and political vendetta against the military backed Caretaker Government which governed Bangladesh from January 2007 to December 2008 has been widespread. The munity could well be an attempt by the BDR to voice their objections for the politico-military authority assumed by the Army.

Finally and most importantly, can the BDR-Army relations in the future overcome the psychological impact of this mutiny? The lack of trust generated through this episode could prove detrimental for the efficacy of the joint operations by the Army and BDR. If the military usurers political power in future, the BDR would be forced to operate in the face of formidable challenges.  

The visual signs of the mutiny may have subsided but its implicit influence will continue to linger for long.

[Photo Courtesy: CNN-IBN]