Known as one of the key architects behind Bangladesh’s early rise in international cricket and cricket diplomacy, Syed Ashraful Huq is deeply pained by the prospect of Bangladesh missing out on the upcoming ICC T20 World Cup, set to be held in India and Sri Lanka from February 7. The former Bangladesh Cricket Board (BCB) general secretary and ex-chief executive officer of the Asian Cricket Council (ACC) has left an indelible mark wherever he has worked during his storied career as a cricket administrator. With Bangladesh now on the brink of facing an exit from the T20 World Cup due to stalled negotiations with the ICC, Ashraful spoke to The Daily Star’s Samsul Arefin Khan over the phone from Bangkok, Thailand, on Thursday, sharing his concerns and insights. Excerpts from the interview are as follows:
The Daily Star (DS): How do you see the events that unfolded in the last few weeks?
Syed Ashraful Huq (SAH): The whole thing has been mishandled. Sports and politics should never be mixed. I feel that we have failed to understand the difference between a domestic tournament and a World Cup.
DS: Your take on how things have been handled.
SAH: The strategy was wrong. You should never go hardline from the start. Everything should have a window for compromise and a dialogue with the opposition. In the ‘80s, there was a chance of an India-Pakistan war at any time. General Zia-ul-Haq [former Pakistan president] went to watch a Test match in Jaipur to diffuse everything. After the Kargil conflict in 2004, the full Indian team went to Pakistan. At that time, Atal Bihari Vajpayee told the team before leaving for Lahore from Delhi that winning or losing wasn't the most important thing; the important thing was winning the hearts of the people of Pakistan.
In 2008, during the terrorist attacks, I was in a key position as the CEO of the ACC. Later, we reasoned with Indian PM Manmohan Singh and Shashank Manohar, president of the BCCI. We told them that if this situation persists between the two countries, things will never improve. They both agreed and came to play the Asia Cup in 2010. These things require discussion. Just saying from here that "I won't go" doesn't work.
DS: How do you see the fact that the players were involved in a discussion only yesterday?
SAH: First of all, going on a hardline stance was our mistake. Why take a hardline in sports? We should follow the process. During the whole process, we were in contact with the ICC because they are the owners of this thing. The ICC has done a security assessment and if the ICC says the security situation is alright -- since it is their tournament -- we have to accept it. If our government doesn't accept it, diplomatic channels are always open. Our board president could have easily gone and asked the Indian board if our security was guaranteed. Did he ask him or whether our government has asked the Indian government whether they can give us protection from the threats? We reacted based on what extreme right-wing groups like the RSS or Shiv Sena were saying.
DS: How do you see the BCB vs ICC standoff?
SAH: We already signed a Participation Agreement [for the World Cup]. We are bound to follow their [ICC’s] words. If we don't follow their words, our government should have asked the Indian government through diplomatic channels. It should not be openly asked by writing to them. Our board could have also asked the Indian board whether it is okay or not [for Bangladesh to travel to India].
DS: Could there be fines, penalties, or anything else imposed on BCB?
SAH: It’s possible. Personally, I think missing a World Cup is a huge loss. Our assets are our cricketers. Players like Litton or Mustafizur work so hard for the glory of playing in a World Cup.
DS: How would you have tackled the situation?
SAH: First, I would recognise my obligation to the ICC because of the signed agreement. If I didn't accept their security assessment, I would use diplomatic channels to ask the Indian government for assurance. For a win-win situation, I would have argued: "If Mustafizur is safe to play in the World Cup in India, why is he not safe for the IPL?" They would have then said yes, and then it would be a win-win situation for both.
DS: Should the BCB have communicated with the other boards?
SAH: The board should have talked and fixed things earlier, so the government's decision wouldn't have to be that way. They should have spoken with the Indian board and the ICC. If they couldn't speak directly, they could have used someone like [Aminul Islam] Bulbul to help fix things. Bulbul and Roger Binny, the former BCCI president, worked together at the ACC. He could have a discussion regarding the Mustafizur issue. If Bulbul couldn’t speak directly, Roger could have talked for him in this matter as well.
DS: How do you see Bulbul as an administrator?
SAH: I have a lot of respect for Bulbul because I was his colleague for 12-15 years at the ACC. Bulbul is a world-class coach educator and world-class programme conductor, but he hardly has any experience as an administrator.
DS: Various media reports claim that Pakistan also might not play if we don’t play. Does their solidarity help us?
SAH: Pakistan will 100% play. We shouldn't find any contentment or satisfaction thinking Pakistan is with us.
