The Crisis in Our Digital Commercial Laws

Five years ago, in the wake of Bangladesh's biggest e-commerce fraud wave, there was a widespread clamor for a dedicated, operational, and enforceable digital commerce law. In response, the Ministry of Commerce formed a panel to enact a dedicated Digital Commerce Act. That draft act has since been written, reviewed, debated at industry roundtables, revised and quietly shelved without being passed into law.

Today, digital commerce in Bangladesh is governed primarily by a handful of instruments rather than a single law: the Digital Commerce Operations Guidelines 2021, the Digital Business Identification Registration Guidelines 2022, and the Cross-Border Digital Commerce Policy 2026. Of these, only the first two are currently in force and the Cross-Border Digital Commerce Policy 2026 remains in draft form and has yet to be adopted as law or formal guidelines.

At the center of these instruments sit the Digital Commerce Operations Guidelines, 2021. The guidelines lay out a comprehensive set of obligations and restrictions that raised hopes for a better-regulated and more efficient digital commerce framework.

The guidelines are nonetheless subject to statutory ambiguities. A more specific example of this vagueness lies at the very first step a foreign business must take, i.e., registration. The 2021 guidelines require every digital commercial establishment to obtain a Unique Business Identification (UBID) from "the authority," but never define who that authority is. The Digital Business Identification Registration Guidelines, 2022, later filled in that blank, naming the Ministry of Commerce and the Office of the Registrar of Joint Stock Companies and Firms (RJSC) as the relevant bodies, and routing the application itself through the Ministry of Commerce. That clarified the "who", nonetheless it did nothing to clarify the "what."

What the 2022 guidelines never spell out is whether obtaining a Digital Business Identification (DBID) is simply a registration formality, or whether it presupposes that the applicant already has an actual local presence in Bangladesh. Neither guideline explicitly demands local physical presence as a precondition. Yet the application form asks for the address of the commercial establishment's office, which reads as an assumption that a physical office already exists. The guidelines further allow a power-of-attorney holder to file the application on the applicant's behalf, which impliedly waives the requirement of the local presence. As such, on one hand, the application form assumes an office and on the other hand the filing method assumes there might not be one. The application form also fails to clarify whether the address of a parent company located outside Bangladesh would be acceptable.

For an instance, a Singapore-based digital marketplace that wants to start selling its digital products to consumers in Bangladesh without opening any physical office there. Under the current guidelines, there is no clear answer to a basic question: can it obtain a DBID purely through a locally appointed representative, or must it first incorporate a branch office with the RJSC under the Companies Act, 1994? The guidelines gesture at both possibilities without committing to either leaving the company to guess or to seek informal confirmation from the Ministry on a case-by-case basis.

Bangladesh's VAT law shows what a resolved version of this problem looks like. Under Section 19 of the Value Added Tax and Supplementary Duty Act, 2012, a non-resident who does not carry on economic activity from a fixed place in Bangladesh is required to appoint a VAT agent, and Rules 16–17 of the VAT and Supplementary Duty Rules, 2016, spell out exactly what that agent does: file returns, remit VAT, and handle compliance on the non-resident's behalf. The Finance Act, 2021, goes a step further and addresses how liability is shared between the agent and the non-resident principal.

Digital commerce law has no equivalent carve-out. It is silent on whether a similar agency arrangement can satisfy the DBID requirement, or whether "authority to file paperwork" is being quietly treated as identical to "authority to represent a locally established business".

Moreover, the framework fails to establish a dedicated cause of action for aggrieved individuals. Instead, it relies on unrelated and older statutes such as the Penal Code 1860, the Money Laundering Prevention Act, 2012, and the Consumers' Rights Protection Act 2009, to penalize anything more severe than a minor warning. Because these older laws were never designed with modern e-commerce fraud in mind, their use opens the door to widespread procedural abuse and operational gridlock. For example, because the Penal Code 1860 lacks clear technical definitions for digital transactions, authorities struggle to assess the core ingredients of physical "cheating" or "forgery" in a virtual environment. Conversely, aggressive over-application of the heavy-handed Money Laundering Act 2012, means minor logistical delays or standard merchant-consumer disputes can be misclassified as criminal asset diversion. This subjects small online business owners to frozen bank accounts and immense administrative harassment.

Additionally, the guidelines' sanctions such as cancellation of a trade license, company registration, or VAT registration are largely symbolic against a platform that has already moved customer money elsewhere.

There has been public outcry over such weak protections and uncertainties since the guidelines were enacted; nonetheless, the debate has resurfaced following the publication of the Cross-Border Digital Commerce Policy 2026. Although there was an expectation that the new policy would offer better protection to consumers and add clarity to the guidelines, none of the uncertainties have been addressed adequately.

In an age when digital commerce is only growing, these are not loose ends that can be left indefinitely. They need to be tied off precisely because doing so is what would give foreign investors the confidence to enter and build in Bangladesh's digital economy, rather than sit on the sidelines waiting for the rules to settle. What the sector needs is not another guideline that exists mainly on paper and is enforced rarely, but a regulation that stipulates clear thresholds, real penalties and a designated authority accountable for applying both.

This article is written by Fateen Farhan. He is a Barrister-at-Law and currently works as a Lecturer at LCLS (South) and an Associate at The Law Counsel. The author can be reached at fateenfarhan62@gmail.com

The Suspension of Folarin Balogun’s Sanction: A Threat to FIFA’s Autonomous Integrity?

During the match on 1 July 2026, Balogun was sent off with a direct red card for serious foul play following a VAR review. However, just four days later on 5 July 2026, FIFA announced the suspension of the automatic one-match ban, placing it instead under a one-year probationary period. The move has fueled widespread discussion about the certainty of disciplinary rules and the neutrality of official decisions in high-stakes international tournaments. This article intends to examine the legal validity of such suspension of the implementation of the sanction.

FIFA operates within a well-established disciplinary framework. The fundamental Laws of the Game prepared by The International Football Association Board (IFAB), sets the universal rules and procedures for football. Additionally, the FIFA World Cup 2026 is regulated by some key regulations, including the FIFA Disciplinary Code May 2026, FIFA World Cup Competition Regulations 2026, official Circulars, and the FIFA Code of Ethics.

The first issue is whether the decision of the referee during the match can be challenged later in any other forum. Such a scope of review has been addressed in the Regulations for the FIFA World Cup 2026. Article 9.6 of the Regulation stipulates that no protests may be made about the referee’s decisions regarding facts connected with play. Such decisions are final and not subject to appeal, unless otherwise stipulated in the FIFA Disciplinary Code.

Article 9 of the FIFA Disciplinary Code further reinforces this position. It states that decisions taken by the referee on the field of play are final and may not be reviewed by the FIFA judicial bodies. However, in cases where a decision by the referee involves an obvious error, such as mistaking the identity of the person penalised, the FIFA judicial bodies may review only the disciplinary consequences of that decision.

Balogun’s situation does not meet any of these exceptions. Therefore, the standard rules have been applied and as such the red card and the automatic one-match suspension is irreversible.

Therefore, it can be concluded that there was no scope for overturning the red card. It is to be noted that the sanction remained in place, but the enforcement of the sanction was suspended.

The controversy does not center around whether the red card was correct. Rather, it raises concerns over whether the suspension of the implementation of the sanction was appropriate and fell within the scope of the Law.

The issue of an automatic one-match suspension following a red card is explicitly addressed across multiple regulatory frameworks. For instance, Article 10.5 of the Regulations for the FIFA World Cup 2026 stipulates that if a player or team official is sent off as a result of either a direct or indirect red card, they are "automatically" suspended from their team’s subsequent match. This principle is further reinforced by Article 66.4 of the FIFA Disciplinary Code, which mandates that a sending-off automatically incurs a suspension from the following match.

Additionally, FIFA World Cup 2026 Circular No. 16, distributed to all participating member associations on 12 May 2026, affirms this protocol and confirms a one-match automatic suspension following a red card.

Consequently, the position of the law is absolute, i.e., any sending-off results in an immediate suspension from the subsequent match. The consistent inclusion of the word "automatic" throughout these regulations underscores the mandatory nature of the rule, leaving no room for discretionary interpretation.

Therefore, having received a red card, Balogun was expected to serve an automatic one-match suspension. However, on 5 July 2026, the FIFA Disciplinary Committee intervened by invoking Article 27 of the FIFA Disciplinary Code to suspend the enforcement of the automatic ban. This decision rendered Balogun immediately eligible for selection, allowing him to play in the United States' Round of 16 fixture against Belgium.

Article 27 of the Code states that the judicial body may decide to fully or partially suspend the implementation of a disciplinary measure. Further discretionary powers have been provided in Article 25. Article 25(1) empowers the judicial body to determine the type and extent of sanctions by considering the objective and subjective elements of the offence, along with any aggravating and mitigating circumstances. Although these articles grant significant post-hoc flexibility to the Disciplinary Committee, nevertheless, the flexibility in the absence of clear guidelines leaves the door open for the abuse of the due process of the law.  

On one hand, the regulations establish a clear and absolute principle of automatic suspension following a red card. In contrast, other articles introduce considerable flexibility that appears to undermine the mandatory nature of the automatic suspension rule. The tension between these provisions raises serious concerns about consistency, predictability, and the integrity of the disciplinary framework.

If the suspension is truly automatic, the broad discretionary powers under Articles 25 and 27 risk rendering that word meaningless. Conversely, if judicial discretion is intended to prevail, then the automatic rule loses its force and invites selective enforcement. Although judicial flexibility of such nature is common, nevertheless, absence of the transparent codification of what constitutes "exceptional circumstances" questions the very certainty of the law.

The application of Article 27 in the Balogun case has triggered widespread criticism centred on perceived political interference in FIFA’s disciplinary process. Reports indicate that US President Donald Trump contacted FIFA President Gianni Infantino to advocate for the suspension of Balogun’s automatic ban. Similarly, UK MP Noah Law’s letter requesting a review for Jarell Quansah’s red card suspension further illustrates how external political actors are now seeking to influence outcomes, using the Balogun precedent as justification. Such political leverage contradicts Article 15 of the FIFA Code of Ethics that requires the FIFA and its officials to remain politically neutral.

The Cristiano Ronaldo precedent from World Cup qualifying shows that Article 27 has been used before, often weighing factors such as disciplinary history and specific circumstances. However, the recent red card received by England’s Jarell Quansah on 6 July 2026, which triggered the standard automatic suspension for England’s quarter-final against Norway, has exposed the inconsistency.

While each case may involve unique mitigating or aggravating factors and FIFA is not required to reach identical outcomes. However, the Balogun ruling has created legitimate expectations that similar sanctions could potentially be reviewed under Article 27. Once FIFA demonstrates willingness to suspend automatic sanctions in selective cases, the criteria for when such discretion applies become unclear and open to challenge.

Such inconsistencies in the law and its application have significantly prejudiced public confidence in the integrity of the game. FIFA should clarify its legal position, particularly on the fundamental question of whether a general discretionary power such as that found in Article 27 can override an automatic consequence expressly stipulated under the special rules on expulsion and match suspensions.

If such an override is permitted, FIFA should clearly define the objective criteria that govern when this power may be exercised. Ultimately, these issues go to the heart of the regulatory framework: when does an automatic suspension stop being automatic, and what safeguards exist to maintain confidence in the regularity and fairness of competitions?

Without clear and transparent explanations, the current framework risks appearing arbitrary and susceptible to external influence. This not only weakens the authority of on-field decisions but also distorts the very peace and unity that FIFA claims to promote through the game.

---

The author is a Barrister-at-Law and can be reached at fateenfarhan62@gmail.com

Let the People Decide the Fate of the Country, Not the Outsiders.

 Let the People Decide the Fate of the Country, Not the Outsiders.

The election year has always been subject to national crisis and foreign intervention for decades. The election year experiences a great deal of anarchy which often questions the credibility of the election. The credibility of an election has always been subject to debate and confusion, which further gives the foreign parties also known as “Our Development Partners” a scope to predominantly monitor the election. This scope to predominantly monitor often leads to interference in the politics and internal affairs of Bangladesh, which is indeed a great threat to the sovereignty of our country.

There are displeasing instances where the external sovereignty of the country has been subject to crisis and contention. Syria has been the victim of such a crisis of external sovereignty lately due to the intervention and interference of foreign parties. And sometimes it becomes the battleground for the rival parties to conduct a cold war, either to extract resources or to prove themselves as a global guardian. 

In such a situation, no one suffers more than the inhabitants of that country. In the name of mediating the crisis, the parties often get busy protecting their very own interest. 

With regard to such eventualities, the foreign parties, in the name of finding a solution, find different ways to exploit and earn from that country. This practice has been prevalent in the history of world politics for centuries.

Some earn by selling weapons and some by interfering in the diplomatic policies of the country. There are instances where different super-powers actively interfered and changed the head of the state by using their leverage and influence, which often questions the efficacy of the Treaty of Westphalia. 

The nations experience such foreign aggression only because they themselves have miserably failed to reach a consensus and conclusion. There will be differences in opinions between political parties, but there also has to be a practice that encourages the ruling party and the opposition to come to a common ground for the better future of the country.

The parties often fail to come to a common ground and for which it is the netizens who have to pay the price. For centuries, the inhabitants of the nation have to pay the price because the special interests of the parties win over the collective national interests. This tendency to prioritize special interests opened the door for external parties to participate in the internal affairs of the country, which undoubtedly questions the very status quo of the sovereignty of the country.

Bangladesh experiences a similar crisis during the time of the election. Every time the ruling party and the opposition fail to reach a consensus and thus gives access to foreign parties to interfere in the politics of Bangladesh. Recently, Russia made a remark stating that the US and EU are actively interfering in the politics of Bangladesh. On the other hand, other stakeholders believe that along with the US, EU, countries like India, China and Russia also demonstrated their intention to interfere in the internal matters of Bangladesh.

Whether it is a business organization or a state, there will be a conflict of opinions and views. This difference of opinion and conflict must be reached to a consensus by the stakeholders of the relevant organization. Failing to do would question the future of the organization. In this way, the state needs to solve its internal issues on its very own instead of involving foreign parties. 

The practice of foreign intervention during the election in the name of monitoring the election has been prevailing for a long time. To mitigate this crisis, the foreign parties are actively applying different soft power and hard power diplomacy in different ways, which has been questioning the sovereignty of our country to a great extent. If such practice is continued in the coming years, the status quo of the democracy and foreign policy of the country will be at stake. This practice itself is a disrespect to the independence of our country.

The situation can only be addressed by means of democracy and nothing but democracy, which is the basis of the independence of Bangladesh back in 1971. If we closely observe the previous election, we will see that the basis of the crisis is the method and mechanism of conducting elections. Often the incumbent government advocates participating in the election under the independent election commission office but not an independent government. On the contrary, the opposition believes that there would be lack of neutrality if the election takes place under the incumbent government. Therefore, they advocate for an independent government during the time of the election. There were instances and events where a caretaker government was appointed to conduct an election which attracted both criticisms and acclamation.

In 1996, the then government of Bangladesh introduced relevant provisions for the formation of a party-neutral caretaker government to conduct a free and fair election.  However, in 2011, the 13th Amendment of the constitution abolished the practice of appointment of the caretaker government. The incumbent government at present believes that the concept of a party-neutral caretaker government is not feasible and unconstitutional. On the other hand, the opposition party has made a contrary remark with respect to the incumbent government's view regarding the formation of a party-neutral caretaker government. Since the parties are not willing to come to a consensus, it is time to let the people decide what they want. 

Although the people get to participate in the election to choose their representative, the time has come, which needs mass public opinion to affirm the method followed by which the election would be conducted. The time has come to ask the general public what they want. In this case, it is only possible by virtue of a referendum. A referendum is a direct vote by the electorate on a proposal, law, or political issue. Along with some other laws, the provision which would allow the practice of referendum was also abolished in 2011 by the 15th Amendment of the Constitution.

The need for a referendum is immense to mitigate this existing political unrest. Therefore, the government must once again introduce a provision that allows the practice of referendum, which would further allow people to voice their opinions regarding whether a caretaker government is needed or not by casting their valuable votes.

This step will play a pivotal role in the political settlement in many ways. Firstly, it will let the general public participate in such an important decision-making process. This sort of constitutional practice is very important to address the ongoing crisis. 

Secondly, this will help to get a feel for the capability of the election commission office. If the election commission office can prove its mettle in this referendum, the opposition parties will gain confidence to participate in the election. This will also serve as a dry run for the election commission before the main election. If they can win back the confidence of the parties and the public, this election commission office could later be appointed as the caretaker government following the vote of the referendum.

In this way, all the parties can reach a consensus and bring back the long-lost political stability. Therefore, it is high time to let the people of the country decide their own fate, instead of outsiders.

The author is a Senior Law Student at the London College of Legal Studies (South) and a Civil-Commercial Mediator of ADR ODR UK. The author can be reached at fateenfarhan62@gmail.com 

Suffering From Noisy Celebrations: A New Normal?

 Suffering From Noisy Celebration: A New Normal?

 Wedding season is indeed full of fun, enjoyment and entertainment. However, it is also a season of profound annoyance and disturbance. The celebration of New Year’s Eve is no different either. In the name of entertainment and fun, individuals often opt for something which begets nothing except suffering and annoyance for the individuals in the periphery. Every occasion in our society comes with loud music. During the wedding season, the organizers engage themselves with loud music for 4 to 5 hours at a stretch, especially at night.

 The EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) defines noise pollution as “unwanted or disturbing sound,” explaining that “sound becomes unwanted when it either interferes with normal activities such as sleeping or conversation or disrupts or diminishes one’s quality of life. The annoyance can have major consequences, primarily to one’s overall health.”

 Most people in our society are keen to work at night. Particularly, students are the worst sufferer of unwanted noise at night. Such noise undoubtedly creates obstruction the productivity of both students and professionals of different levels. These noises also restrict the proper sleep of any individual. Due to the high volume, it becomes difficult for the individuals to sleep properly and failure to sleep properly questions the productivity of the next day and the cycle continues. Most of the localities in Dhaka experience at least two weddings per week in winter, especially in December and January.

 These noises at night aren’t only affecting any certain individual or a group, rather it affects each and every member of that locality. This is indeed a great threat to national progress and prosperity.

 According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, “Listening to loud noise for a long time can overwork hair cells in the ear, which can cause these cells to die. The hearing loss progresses as long as the exposure continues. Harmful effects might continue even after noise exposure has stopped. Damage to the inner ear or auditory neural system is generally permanent.” Thus, such kind of entertainment is adversely affecting human lives to a great extent. Nevertheless, older people are more vulnerable to such kinds of actions.

The National Emergency Service 999 reported receiving 9,238 complaints in 2021 over loud fireworks, loud music, various programs, and other loud noises. In 2020, there were 7,952 people. This indicates a 16% annual rise in the number of complaints.

Lately, there have been incidents that gravely affected the public at large. Reports confirmed that individuals succumbing to noisy celebrations have been almost a common thing during any celebration. Nevertheless, it has to be observed that, not only humans, but birds and other animals are also one of the worst sufferers of such noisy celebrations. Birds face reproductive complications due to such noises. Also, experts have expressed their views that loud noise during the night lowers egg production. Chickens like all vertebrates are governed by a circadian rhythm that is governed by the natural light/dark cycle of day and night and waking up the chickens at night with loud noises will lead to stress and anxious chicken. In this way, it affects the density of egg production. Noise pollution has always been a great threat, however, these added arrangement concerning noisy celebration has been affecting the quality of human and animals extremely.

 There are numerous instances where such action has been considered unlawful. On the grounds of public nuisance and ‘The Noise Pollution (Control) Rules 2006’, the consequences of such action have been addressed.

 CHAPTER XIV of the constitution of Bangladesh concerns offences affecting public health, safety, convenience, decency and morals, where the issue of public nuisance has been addressed.  S.268 of the  Penal Code, 1860 states that “A person is guilty of a public nuisance who does any act or is guilty of an illegal omission which causes any common injury, danger or annoyance to the public or to the people in general who dwell or occupy property in the vicinity, or which must necessarily cause injury, obstruction, dangers or annoyance to persons who may have occasion to use any public right. A common nuisance is not excused on the ground that it causes some convenience or advantage.” Here, noisy celebrations deriving from loud music and fireworks should be considered a form of public nuisance and it must be dealt with accordingly.  

 S.290 of The Penal Code, 1860 addresses the punishment followed by the issue of public nuisance. This provision states that, “Whoever commits a public nuisance in any case not otherwise punishable by this Code, shall be punished with a fine which may extend to two hundred taka” Furthermore, S.291 of the same provision states that, “Whoever repeats or continues a public nuisance, having been enjoined by any public servant who has lawful authority to issue such injunction not to repeat or continue such nuisance, shall be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine, or with both.”

Therefore, it can be said that an aggrieved individual has the scope to protect his/her right under the laws of public nuisance.

 Along with restrictions imposed by the laws of public nuisance, noise pollution is also governed by 'The Noise Pollution (Control) Rules 2006', where different measures, restrictions and control mechanisms have been addressed to minimize noise pollution. The rules correctly addressed the issue of pollution based on areas like silent areas, residential areas, mixed areas, commercial areas, and industrial areas. Different areas have different measures and limitations. The limitations are measured in the scale of decibels. However, the rules stated that, with prior permission, there can be an extension of the time limit, but not more than 10 PM and it can’t be of 5 hours long.

 In accordance with the Rule, the concerned officials may issue a written directive for any deviation from the established limits; failure to comply is a crime punishable by up to one month in jail and/or a fine of up to 5,000 BDT. One may get a fine or a prison sentence of up to 10,000 BDT for a second or subsequent offense.

 Experts believe that the law is not feasible enough. Most individuals in society are not aware of the procedure and scope to measure in decibels. At the same time, the time limit is not seemed to be maintained accordingly. The noises concerning loud music sustain even after 10 PM and the individuals are not seemed to get charged for the wrongdoings. Since they are not charged with any offence even after not following the prescribed guidelines, people started to doubt the existence of the status quo of the law.

 Such kind of actions exposes individuals to the risk of different deadly diseases and permanent harm. Not only this, as addressed above, there are reports where individuals died due to such noisy celebrations. Albeit there are such fatal consequences of such celebration, the individuals are less likely to get charged for the action, which further questions the feasibility and status quo of the law.

To prevent individuals from the atrocities of noisy celebrations, a practical approach concerning feasibility and effectiveness has to be adopted. Additionally, the law enforcement agency has to be stricter with the application of the law.

 However, it must be noted that modification of the law is not enough if we are not compassionate, sympathetic and responsible regarding our celebration. The celebration must not be the cause of someone’s suffering and anxiety.

 The writer is a 2^nd Year LL.B Student at London College of Legal Studies (South).

The writer can be reached at fateenfarhan62@gmail.com

 

 

 

 

 

 

Return of American Primacy: Is America winning the game of power politics?

In recent days, international politics has been all about who can control whom. This tendency of controlling one another is termed the “game of power politics” by political scientists. When countries like China and Russia have adopted Wolf Warrior Diplomacy and Hard Power Diplomacy respectively to win the race of being the sole hegemon, the US is actively playing soft power diplomacy and different other policies and is more likely to win the race of establishing global dominance.

 After the fall of the Soviet Union, the United States has been the only hegemon. However, in the 2010s, the US lost a lot of its credibility as the only hegemon due to different internal and global political crises.

 China’s Belt and Road Initiative and Russia’s war on oil have questioned the US's global political influence to a great extent. To bring back its long-lost hegemony, the US is prioritizing policies like Soft Power Diplomacy and Monroe Doctrine. America is being profoundly successful in executing and implementing these policies due to its developed internal political culture and practices. America’s politics is more dependent on policy rather than history, tradition or ideologies, which gives them the room to practice politics and diplomacy freely.

 The US has rightly observed that implying hard power diplomacy often results in loss and hardly brings any materialistic gain.  So, the US has opted for Soft Power Diplomacy instead of Hard Power Diplomacy which ensues more practical benefits. American Political Scientist Joseph Nye first formulated the theory of Soft Power Diplomacy where he talked about the importance of soft power diplomacy in maintaining long-term bilateral relationships. 

 Dominance by means of hard power diplomacy often indicates a lack of sustainability and also doesn’t go hand in hand with the cost-benefit calculation.  We have seen that the US was hardly able to keep countries like Iraq, Libya and Afghanistan under their control by the virtue of Hard Power Diplomacy for a notable period. On contrary, before WWII Japan and Germany shared an adversary relationship with the US.

 In WWII, Japan and Germany experienced major destruction. The US then provided necessary assistance to Japan to rise and further took the responsibility for Japan’s national security. The consequence of this is, that Japan is one of the biggest allies of the US now. The US didn’t only aid Japan, by means of the Marshal Plan, the US helped West Germany to re-organize itself, and till now Germany is also one of the finest allies of the US. This shows how Soft Power Diplomacy is resulting in long-term bilateral relationships. 

 In the present era, the US is following the footsteps of Soft Power Diplomacy too. However, in recent days, the US has been choosing a different sort of Soft Power Diplomacy. Earlier, the US opted for military actions against the governments that were not obedient to the US and its policies. Nowadays, the US administration is not opting for military actions rather they are providing different sorts of aid, assistance, and technical and diplomatic support to anti-governments of those countries and states to take down the existing administration that doesn’t comply and act in accordance with the policies of the US. For instance, Venezuela’s current government is headed by Nicolas Maduro who is a Russian ally. On the other hand, the opposition of Nicolas Maduro is Juan Guaidó. The US is aiding the opposition in a different manner to take down Maduro’s administration. Again, the US is providing necessary diplomatic assistance to those who are Pro Democrats in China. i.e., who are against the Xi Jinping administration. In the same way, in Cuba, whenever there arises an anti-government movement, the US incites the protestors. Again, when any kind of protest arises against the government of Iran, US politicians showcase support for the protestors explicitly in different social media. In this way, the US has changed the shape and form of implying soft power diplomacy, which undoubtedly seems to be more politically and diplomatically efficient in order to make the US-led bloc more influential.

 Biden Administration has shown its diplomatic acuteness by adopting Monroe Doctrine at the very right time. This doctrine encourages the administration to isolate themselves for a certain period to avoid all sorts of conflict in order to organize themselves to appear as a more resourceful nation. The US was not as influential as it is today during its emergence and independence. One of the theories which kept the US relevant until now is the Monroe Doctrine.  To understand Monroe Doctrine, it’s important to have a glance at the history.  The US has got independence in 1776. From 1750 to 1850 North and South America was under Europe’s control. The US had no potential influence over these countries back then. However, in 1817 Monroe became US president. In 1823, he came up with a theory where he proposed that Latin America will not interfere in the policy and other internal affairs of Europe and that Europe must do the same with Latin America. This policy was also claimed as a “Non-interventionist” policy which implies that there will be no intervention and no intervention will be encouraged in the territory of Latin America. In this way, Monroe isolated Latin America from foreign intervention and conflicts. Whilst Latin America was staying isolated, different parts of Europe got involved in conflicts. Meanwhile different parts of Europe were busy with conflicts, and America used this as an advantage to prepare itself as a resourceful nation. After preparing itself as a resourceful nation, Latin America stepped into international politics as a superpower and almost a world leader by taking part in World War II.

 Now if we analyze the doctrine in the present context of the US, the application of the theory will get more sense. Lately, as we have seen above, the US has lost its credibility as the sole hegemon. To restore its influence, the US seems to opt for the Monroe Doctrine.

 Russia and China are two major superpowers in the present world along with the US. Russia is already involved in a few hidden wars. If we notice we can see that, by inciting Ukraine, the US had made Russia involved in another conflict. The US didn’t directly participate in the conflict. However, the US worked as a catalyst to fuel up the conflict and they were arguably successful in their attempt. On the other hand, there has been tension going on between China and Taiwan. The tension was highly fueled when Nancy Pelosi, an American politician serving as speaker of the United States House of Representatives arrived in Taiwan. On the Taiwan trip, she talked in favor of the freedom of Taiwan’s territory which is contrary to the One-China principle. In this way, by not getting directly involved in a conflict, the US almost initiated a conflict. What we can understand from this is, that when the major superpowers are busy in conflict, it would be very easy-going for the US to organize themselves and restore American Primacy.

 US’s application of theories like soft power diplomacy and Monroe’s doctrine is indeed a laudable example of a cost-effective and efficient process to establish global dominance.

 Whether what they are doing is fair or not is still in question, however, in the game of power politics, America is again proving its diplomatic adequacy in power politics to become a sole world leader.

 

To conclude, it can be said, with the rise of strong soft power diplomacy and the Monroe Doctrine, the world is more likely to experience the lost American Primacy once again.

 

The author can be reached at fateenfarhan62@gmail.com

Fateen Farhan,

Freelance Writer,

2^nd Year LL.B Student, London College of Legal Studies(South)

Bangladesh in 2021: Won or Lost?

 

Bangladesh in 2021: Won or lost?

It’s a matter of great pride that Bangladesh marks 50 years of liberation war victory. The entire nation celebrates the 50th year of independence with absolute pride and joy. Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman was awarded the Gandhi Peace Prize 2020. We have lost a lot of frontliners of different levels due to Covid 19. However, a gigantic success on vaccination was observed and Bangladesh was seen in the top in South Asia in Nikkey Covid recovery ranking. Good communication indicates growth and development. Bangladesh experienced massive infrastructural development since a good number of bridges which connect different parts of the country were constructed by the Ministry of Roads and Highways.The infrastructural completion of Padma bridge was seen in 2021, which will play a great role to ensure smooth and uninterrupted communication. Bangladesh’s first overhead metro train makes a trial run in 2021. One of the most important infrastructural developments in this year is the installation of Maitree Bridge which  is a 150-meter bridge on Feni River which links Tripura in India with Chittagong port in Bangladesh. This bridge doesn’t only ensure a better and easier trade system but also assents to a strong diplomatic relation between these two neighboring countries. A better GDP, Rise per capita income by $163 and finally LDC graduation is the outcome of all these prodigious infrastructural development. LDC graduation introduces new opportunities and also stands a great barrier in different sectors. LDC graduation dictates that Bangladesh will no longer be considered as least developed country rather it will be considered as a developing country which will enhance the reputation of Bangladesh globally. This achievement highlights the growth and economic development worldwide. However, graduation will restrict some certain facilities which is a matter of worry and this will be a great threat if Post-LDC friendly policies are not initiated and maintained accurately. Bangladesh also becomes the 2nd economically free nation in South Asia which highlights the country’s strong geopolitical position and economic importance of this region. Bangladesh was seen to sign different trade agreements to ensure protracted and sustainable diplomatic relationships and a business-friendly environment and they are notably with Srilanka, Australia, Bhutan and France, which will ensure different kinds of benefits in trade and commerce.

Bangladesh also joined China-led biggest trade bloc RCEP(Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership) which will enable the country to stay eligible for duty-free trade facilities in the markets of nearly one-third of the global economies after it graduates to a developing nation in 2026. 

For the very first time, Bangladesh became a lender. The central bank provided Sri Lanka with a $200m loan The largest solar plant in Bangladesh started its journey. This year, Bangladesh entered the revolutionary 5G era and also the nuclear era by building the Rooppur Nuclear Plant. Bangladesh has signed a contract for setting up the 3rd Submarine Cable. 53,340 homeless people were acquainted with new houses which is a far-reaching step to alleviate poverty and ensure quality living. Notwithstanding that, the country has suffered severe economic losses due to the pandemic, the firm determination and dedication of the authorities led the country to experience this remarkable progress.

However, there are some appalling incidents that override such progress. Lately, the US government hosted a democratic summit, where 100+ countries have been invited but there was no invitation allocated for Bangladesh which questioned the very existence of the bilateral relationship between Bangladesh and the US, and also questioned the status quo of democracy. The US Department of Treasury and the Department of State imposed sanctions on the Rapid Action Battalion (Rab) and seven of its current and former officials on December 10 on the grounds of violation of human rights. Avalanche of forgery was seen by different e-commerce companies this year. In the last few years, 64 people lost their lives while over 150 people were injured in road accidents every day on average across the country, according to Bangladesh Jatri Kalyan Samiti, which is indeed a matter of grave deplorable concern. A total of 43,856 people have died while 91,358 were injured in 31,793 road accidents in this time. In 2018, 7,221 died in 5,514 accidents while in 2019, 7,855 died in 5,516 accidents. 18 people were killed every day on average in road accidents in 2020. Even during the pandemic, 6,686 people lost their lives and 8,600 were injured in a total of 4,891 road accidents in 2020 in Bangladesh. In the first eight months of 2021, a total of 3,502 people were killed and 3,479 sustained injuries in 3,701 road accidents. Bangladesh ranks 106th among 183 countries for having the most road accidents. Such massive infrastructural developments become meaningless and useless when road safety is at the stake. Rape is the most growing threat and extremely violates the right to bodily integrity. The number of rape victims in the county has doubled in 2019 to that of 2018. A total of 1413 females were subjected to rape in 2019. During the pandemic, the country witnessed 1,093 rapes in the first 10 months of 2020. However in 2021,on an average 3 incidents of rape cases have been reported daily. According to Ain o Salish Kendra, at least 1,247 women were raped in the January-November period. However, it is believed that real cases are more than the reported ones. The deteriorating statistics often question the stability and efficiency of law enforcement agencies.Bangladesh experienced the highest border killing last in 2020 in  decades. However, 11 were killed and 1 was raped in the first 9 months of this 2021. The question of safety in the border areas still is very unclear. According to Amnesty International, at least 222 persons were allegedly slain by Bangladeshi security forces in extrajudicial executions in 2020, with at least 31 cases of enforced disappearance documented. According to the Bangladeshi human rights organization named Odhikar, between January and June of 2021, 16 people were forced to disappear. Good number of people have died in election-related violence during Union Parishad elections, which highly questions the efficiency of law enforcement agencies. Bangladesh has seen an extreme rise in communal attacks during Durga Puja. Bangladesh ranks 124th among 139 countries on Rule of Law. In 2020, Bangladesh was in 115th position out of 128 countries. Bangladesh is positioned at 146 among 180 countries in 2020 and also was no different in 2019 according to Transparency International Bangladesh(TIB). Bangladesh moved 4 notches up on the Economist Intelligence Unit's Democracy Index 2020, improving on the indicator of political culture. Bangladesh secured 76th position, among 167 countries. Bangladesh has also been considered as the 7th most vulnerable to climate change and 2nd in fossil fuel deaths. Vietnam was seen to overtake Bangladesh in the race of clothing exporting.

Amidst great wins, we experienced costly losses which are extremely difficult to afford at this point, when we have started experiencing flavours of development in different sectors. Along with building great infrastructure, the government and the countrymen altogether must work hand in glove to ensure justice,environment, business, human rights, communal harmony and most importantly living-friendly Bangladesh.

Why Youth In Politics Is Important

 Two-thirds of Bangladesh consists of youth but their representation in the parliament is extremely negligible. The influence of aged people in the parliament is known as gerontocracy. Gerontocracy is often a threat to actual development when the majority of the country is youth. Now you might be thinking that experience matters and that gerontocracy and exclusion of youth from policy-making and actual politics is justifiable. So is it actually justifiable? We will know about this, but first, let's see what do we mean by “actual” politics? Lately, dedication is valued based on how many times you went to jail, how many times you were stabbed, how many times you suffered for your party. To encapsulate, the more you suffer, the better politician you are. What does it incentivize in the long run? It dictates you to preclude oneself from learning governing policies but to include oneself in unnecessary brainless physical activities, which is never in the favor of the common man. Politics is not always about how much irrelevant struggle you take part in, but more about how much you make yourself capable to serve in the best possible way. When you are precluded from learning governing skills, understand you are not a part of “actual politics”, rather you are part of someone’s weapon where you are not being properly valued.  

Now the question is, why do the opinions of the youth matter? In this generation, youth has faced new forms of political, environmental, educational, social and different other problems which the old people have hardly suffered. Since they have not suffered, it’s plausible that the probability of being concerned about such issues will be very trivial and inconsiderable. No one knows the solution more than the sufferers. The most discussed issue is climate change and the involvement of digitalization in most sectors. Do you think one who has no pragmatic experience can represent these issues of the respective field in the decision-making process?

Politics is often considered a synonym to forgery due to its inefficiency and the tendency of exploitation of the involved personalities. This is the reason why the majority of the youth tends to preclude themselves from being a part of this. This negative attitude is a huge threat to future politicians. Politics is all about practice and practical knowledge is the foremost requirement. One can never be a good politician just by reading books; practical knowledge must exist to make oneself a noteworthy representative of people. It takes time, effort and practice to be a good politician and a good politician is a pillar of a successful nation. The country will cease to exist if politics is used as a synonym to forgery as mentioned above. The experienced ones must put effort to negate such deplorable identification. They must inspire the youth to join politics that speaks for the people and which believes to serve rather than getting served.  

In case of selecting a party either to vote or participate, it should be noted, while taking our birth, we couldn’t choose our family, but now we can choose a family which will represent and ensure the rights of everyone. Present context should be prioritized over history and tradition.

The rise in gerontocracy will always result in inefficiency, but a balance regarding skills, race, religion, sex, and age will indeed maintain veracity and will be able to speak and read the mind of the working class and the large mass. At the same time, it has to be ensured that youth must involve themselves in the politics to change but not the politics to exploit or get exploited.