The way the members and the representatives of the diplomatic missions are going about the affairs of Bangladesh is, to my mind, tantamount to interference in the country's internal affairs. Notwithstanding the various lapses and shortcomings in the so-called democratic management of the country, I would like to ask of these highly "concerned" diplomats as to how come none of their country representatives are ever known to have been "concerned" in the least about many other countries of the world who systematically continue to murder democracy and democratic traditions?

This in itself is a form of terrorising technique in subjugating a lesser nation amongst others. Would any of the country representatives, had they been in Islamabad or elsewhere, be so vocal as they are here? I have my doubts. They talk about human rights violations, of terrorism, of poverty alleviation, of failures in family planning, of failures in upholding democratic traditions, etc. Yes we do fall short of the otherwise recognised acceptable levels in tackling all these vital issues of social and political management, but the fact remains that many other countries of the world far more modern and militarily more "powerful" than ours can be accused equally of such failures. It is this "holier-than-thou" attitude of the so-called "developed" world that is causing the problems all over the world. This attitude of the more affluent nations towards the comparatively lesser countries is making people of these countries angry, both Muslim and non-Muslim.

The world's most powerful nation goes about killing innocent people and children in Iraq and provides all kinds of moral and military support to a particular state for forcibly and illegally occupying lands belonging to other peoples and then like a Good Samaritan calls for mediation in settlement of the "disputes." It is like one fine morning some unknown persons breaking into your home to occupy two of the rooms and then asking you to come to terms for a negotiated settlement.

This powerful and mighty nation who has the capability of waging seven major wars around the globe simultaneously, also trains mercenaries in the garb of intelligence agents, whose job it is to create civil disturbances and even find ways and means for overthrowing other governments so that it can "install" government of its choice. It is also a declared policy of this very government to bomb the hell out of other sovereign nations until they are subjugated to accept its own brand of "democracy and freedom." In the name of fighting and winning the war against terror, it is simply working towards giving it a permanent place. This country today is one of the leading nations in violating all forms of human rights around the globe. It has lost all moral and ethical rights to even talk of human rights.

The other day we saw the 9/11 of London. No sane person can ever condone such wanton killing of innocent lives. We are in full agreement with the Assistant Commissioner of Police of Metropolitan London who said: "We want to conclude by making it absolutely clear that no one should be in any doubt that the work last Thursday is that of extremists and criminals." Yes, indeed we could not agree with him more.

Yet I strongly feel that Bush and Blair are going about tackling the war on terror in the wrong way. Dealing with the symptoms of the "disease" will never cure the ailment. Unless the Iraq issue is resolved, until the so called multinational occupation forces quit Iraq, until the US troops quit Afghanistan, until a fair and equitable policy is adopted in resolving the Palestine issue, until it stops interfering in the internal affairs and raging war against sovereign nations, the scourge of terrorism will prevail and continue to gain momentum as time progresses.

Blush (Bush and Blair) must understand that it can no longer subdue terror by terror. Has the powerful world of the west including the US and Great Britain ever tried to either analyse or enter into the minds of the masterminds of terror. These people also come from an educated background. Many of them are doctors and engineers. The Blush duo must realise that they are not fighting mere criminals, but criminals with an agenda far and beyond the cruel and senseless violence. There is also this problem of credibility.

Today the entire Muslim world, including many poor nations around the globe, is suspicious of all actions of Blair and Bush. This is perhaps one of the major causes, why the two forerunners against the war on terror continue to have limited success. No less than a person of the stature of that great leader from the subcontinent Mahatma Gandhi has best described the situation in one of his speeches delivered as early as 1920: "The moment there is suspicion about a person's motives, everything he does becomes tainted." The way the duo invaded Iraq on false pretexts, its credibility continues to be questioned the world over.

I would like to conclude this brief commentary by quoting some remarks made by that renowned author Karen Armstrong in her book, The Battle for God:

"Fundamentalism cannot be defeated, and, in a sense fundamentalists won a great victory. By the middle of the 20thcentury, it was generally assumed that religion would never again play a role in great events. Today, however, no government can ignore it. Israel began as a defiantly secular state, and now the Prime Minster of Israel must go hat in hand to the religious parties to make a government. Even in the United States politicians have to flaunt their born again credentials. We have to try to make huge imaginative effort to put ourselves in the shoes of the fundamentalists because they threaten our values as much as we threaten theirs. We can make war in a minute but peace takes a long time."

Shamsher Chowdhury is a freelance writer.