Opinion

Milestone School Tragedy: Everything ‘Under Erasure (Sous Rature)”?

Shweta Irina 29 July 2025

A water color image of Mahreen and Masuka

‘Now we begin to see how Derrida’s notion of ‘sous rature’ differs from that of Heidegger’s. Heidegger’s Being might point at an inarticulable presence. Derrida’s trace is the mark of the absence of a presence, an always already absent present, of the lack at the origin that is the condition of thought and experience.’ [Translator’s Preface in ‘Of Grammatology’ by Jacques Derrida, page: xvii (Translated from French to English by Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak, The Johns Hopkins University Press; First Published; Maryland, 1976 and First Indian Edition by Motilal Banarsidass Publishers Private Limited, Delhi).] Although renowned French philosopher Jacques Derrida had explained the term ‘sous rature (under erasure)’ from a linguistic, philosophical and metaphysical viewpoint, today the epithet ‘sours rature (under erasure)’ is being used from a more comprehensible prism. ‘Under Erasure’ seems equivalent to ‘self-censorship.’ Now what is ‘self-censorship?’ ‘Self-censorship, also known as self-censure, is a phenomenon that occurs when individuals purposefully choose to limit or restrain their own

expression, thoughts, or actions. It often arises out of fear or apprehension of potential consequences, such as social backlash, legal repercussions, or professional harm. While self-censorship can be seen as a means of self-preservation or complying with societal norms, it is a complex and intricate concept that warrants deeper examination (https://psychologyfanatic.com/self-censure/). To put in more lucid terms: do the authors, journalists or even common people feel ‘self-censured’ before writing anything which may challenge authority, hierarchy or hegemony? Be it state, government, religion, patriarchy, culture or anything with a cumulative force against an ordinary individual or a group of individuals with less power to bargain? How much free are we in the real sense? Can we speak up, write or claim for our just demands within a coercive state machinery? If Derrida seems too difficult to be understood, novelist Milan Kundera may sound somehow easier who underscored ‘the struggle of man against power as the struggle of memory against forgetting.’ Kundera,…

Analysis, Bangladesh, Current Affairs, Journalism, Review

Guilty before Trial: A Dissection of Al Jazeera’s “36 Days in July”

Iconus Clustus 27 July 2025

Al Jazeera’s “36 Days in July” is not journalism—it is a selectively sourced, politically motivated character assassination. By platforming figures tied to extremist groups and omitting critical legal and historical context, it weaponizes leaked audio to vilify Sheikh Hasina and legitimize a coup born of coordinated violence.

27 July 2025

1: The Spectacle Disguised as Journalism Al Jazeera’s “HASINA – 36 Days in July” is marketed as an investigative documentary. In truth, it functions as a media indictment. From framing to narration, from sourcing to visual mood-setting, the entire feature seems less interested in investigating the truth than in delivering a preordained verdict: Sheikh Hasina is guilty. Al Jazeera and the BBC, in their respective pieces, center their accusations on a short leaked audio clip — barely 80 seconds long — which they treat as a smoking gun. For the sake of brevity, this article will only focus on Al Jazeera Documentary. This audio captures a voice that has allegedly been attributed to the former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, issuing directives in the midst of a violent uprising. The audio, at the time of publishing, is neither forensically authenticated nor interpreted with journalistic caution. Worse, its use is framed within a montage of insinuations, selective voices, and emotionally charged imagery,

producing what can only be described as trial-by-media. Yet the words themselves offer no blanket order for violence, let alone student killings. The central "evidence" of this so-called investigation — the short leaked audio clip — that this documentary and the BBC feature appeared within days of each other, using the same core audio material and overlapping narrative structure, raises serious questions about coordination — if not lobbying. It is not implausible to suspect that this is not independent journalism but a synchronized narrative push, especially considering the actors it platformed and the timing with an ongoing legal trial. 2: The So-Called Smoking Gun – A Short Audio, A Long Stretch In the audio materials, the individual in question can be heard stating: “I have told them — if necessary, shoot… Students’ lives must be saved… But if anyone creates terror, if there’s no other way — you must act.” The voice in the audio reveals a response to a…

Analysis, Bangladesh, Current Affairs, USA

Trading Sovereignty: The Hidden Price of the U.S.-Bangladesh Tariff Agreement

Robi Das 19 July 2025

The proposed U.S.-Bangladesh Reciprocal Tariff Agreement is a stark threat to Bangladesh’s sovereignty and economic independence. While promising reduced tariffs on garments, it demands sweeping concessions that serve U.S. interests alone. The draft imposes structural subordination, forcing Bangladesh to mirror American embargoes, compromise its trade alliances, and surrender regulatory control. It lacks genuine reciprocity and risks destabilising domestic industries and foreign policy. This agreement must not proceed without full public disclosure, parliamentary scrutiny, and a renegotiation that defends national interest and economic justice. Signing it as-is would be a grave betrayal of Bangladesh’s sovereignty and a dangerous precedent for future diplomacy.

19 July 2025

Background The U.S. and Bangladesh have entered intense negotiations to finalise a Reciprocal Tariff Agreement aimed at reducing tariffs on Bangladeshi exports to the U.S., particularly in the ready-made garments (RMG) sector, which is Bangladesh's largest export category to the U.S. The Bangladesh government sought to conceal the details of the terms and conditions imposed by the U.S. government. Thanks to Officer Mukitul Hasan of the National Board of Revenue (NBR), we obtained the details of the 21-page draft agreement. Bangladesh government suspended Mukit and filed a sedition case against him. For a clause-wise review of the agreement please read the article of Iconus Clustus on Muktangon. The contents of the draft agreement do not give much space to Bangladesh. The plain and simple message of U.S. government is “either it’s my way, or highway”. Bangladesh is clearly in a dilemma. If it agrees to the terms and conditions, it will lose China, which is one of the biggest sources

of raw material. Without the raw material from China, a lot of businesses will not be able to offer their products in cheaper price. Bangladesh, if agrees to this agreement, will lose China as a development and commercial partner. China will not take it easily. The fallout with China will also compromise the foreign policy of Bangladesh, I.e., friendship with everyone, hostility with none. In this article, we will examine the structure of the proposed agreement, discuss its key highlights and primary concerns, which will illustrate why the Bangladesh government sought to conceal the agreement's details. The article will also show you the ‘colonial’ mentality of the U.S. government will further cripple the economy of Bangladesh. Structure of the Agreement The agreement is divided into six major sections, each containing over a hundred conditions: Tax-related conditions Non-tariff barrier conditions Digital trade and technology conditions Rules of Origin conditions Economic and national security conditions Commercial conditions Key U.S. Proposals and…

Uncategorised

Critical Review of the “US-Bangladesh Agreement on Reciprocal Trade”

Iconus Clustus 19 July 2025

This paper critically examines the leaked draft of the U.S.–Bangladesh Reciprocal Trade Agreement, revealing it to be a deeply asymmetrical arrangement that compromises Bangladesh’s regulatory sovereignty, economic autonomy, and geopolitical independence. Under the guise of market access and tariff relief, the agreement imposes sweeping U.S. oversight across digital governance, labor law, defense procurement, environmental regulation, and data control. Rather than fostering mutual benefit, the proposed terms reflect a strategic restructuring of Bangladesh’s legal and economic infrastructure to serve U.S. commercial and strategic interests. The analysis situates this deal within the broader context of post-colonial dependency and calls for urgent public scrutiny, renegotiation, and activist resistance.

19 July 2025

1. Introduction In July 2025, a confidential draft of the so-called U.S.-Bangladesh Agreement on Reciprocal Trade was leaked. At first glance, it appeared to be a bilateral deal to facilitate trade flows between the two countries. However, on closer inspection, the document revealed something far more consequential: a complex and far-reaching framework that, if ratified, would embed U.S. influence deep into Bangladesh’s economic, legal, and digital infrastructures. Drafted amid political instability and under an unelected interim government, this agreement must be understood not merely as a trade pact, but as a coercive tool of structural realignment: one that reorients Bangladesh’s legal, economic, and geopolitical frameworks to align with U.S. priorities, without public consultation or democratic mandate. This paper offers a critical examination of the agreement, exploring its key provisions, underlying logic, and broader implications. It further contextualizes the agreement within a lineage of similarly coercive international arrangements and concludes with strategic recommendations for activists, policymakers, and civil society actors committed

to protecting Bangladesh’s sovereignty. 1.1 Security Classification • Marked CONFIDENTIAL, with “Modified Handling Authorized.” • Declassification set for 4 years after enforcement/negotiation closure. • Suggests it is either a draft or pre-ratification version. • Legal effect is not yet public—yet expectations and timelines for Bangladeshi compliance are clear and immediate. 2. Critical Analysis of the Agreement The agreement, sprawling across 21 pages, is organized into six major sections: taxation, non-tariff barriers, digital trade and technology, rules of origin, commercial and national security terms, and investment and services. While billed as reciprocal, the obligations it places on Bangladesh far outweigh those asked of the United States. 2.1 Tariff & Non-Tariff Barriers One of the most striking aspects of the draft agreement lies in its treatment of tariff and non-tariff barriers. Bangladesh is effectively being asked to lower customs duties specifically on U.S. goods, potentially undermining the country’s ability to protect its local industries through strategic tariffs. Even more troubling, however, is…

Analysis, Bangladesh

Whistleblowing as a Civic Duty: Upholding Mukit’s Stand for Integrity

Robi Das 18 July 2025

In Bangladesh today, speaking truth to power can feel like standing alone in a storm. Mukit’s stand reminds us that every citizen carries the power—and responsibility—to safeguard the common good. It’s on us, as a society and as a government, to ensure that when conscience strikes, it finds not chains, but open doors and a grateful nation.

18 July 2025

In Bangladesh today, speaking truth to power can feel like standing alone in a storm. Mukit chose that storm. When he exposed misuse of public resources within a government institution, he did more than bare corruption—he performed an act of public service. What Did Mukit Do: Mukitul Hasan, Second Secretary at the Customs Policy Wing of the National Board of Revenue (NBR), has been suspended for allegedly leaking a classified state document. The leaked material pertained to sensitive tariff negotiations between Bangladesh and the United States, which were protected under a non-disclosure agreement (NDA). The breach was considered a serious violation of official discipline, especially given Hasan’s direct involvement in the negotiation process. A Bengali-language media outlet had published a report based on the leaked document, which was later withdrawn. In response, the NBR filed a case and issued the suspension order, signed by Chairman Abdur Rahman Khan. Separately, M Zillur Rahman, Deputy Director of the Central Intelligence Cell,

was also suspended for publicly tearing his transfer order, alongside 14 other officials facing similar disciplinary action. Mukit’s Courage and Its Costs Mukit’s decision to disclose wrongdoing wasn’t born of personal vendetta. He witnessed funds diverted from essential healthcare projects and watched promises to the poorest slip away. By going public, he risked career derailment, social ostracism, and even legal harassment under outdated secrecy laws. Yet Mukit’s bravery shines as a beacon: it reminds us that transparency isn’t optional. It’s the lifeblood of democracy and trust. The Legal Shield in Bangladesh The Public Interest Information Disclosure (Provide Protection) Act of 2011 was designed precisely for voices like Mukit’s: Legal Immunity: He cannot face criminal, civil, or departmental action for revealing truthful, public-interest information. Confidentiality: His identity is protected unless he opts into disclosure. Protection from Retaliation: Demotion, forced retirement, harassment—all barred if he’s a government employee. Evidence Shielding: Disclosures can’t be used against him in proceedings unless found maliciously false. …