Michael Rubin calls for US sanctions on Muhammad Yunus over rights violations

In a hard-hitting exclusive interview, Dr. Michael Rubin—former Pentagon official and senior fellow at both the American Enterprise Institute and the Middle East Forum—delivers a scathing critique of Muhammad Yunus, whose downfall is imminent. Rubin asserts that the people of Bangladesh are no longer blind to Yunus’s misdeeds, and if he fails to grasp this shifting tide, he will find himself spending his final days behind bars. Taking his criticism a step further, Dr. Rubin calls on US Secretary of State Marco Rubio to take decisive action, urging sanctions under the Global Magnitsky Act against Yunus for his blatant abuses of human rights and violations of international law.

Here is the full excerpt of this explosive interview:

Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury:  Hello readers! Our guest today is Dr. Michael Rubin. Dr. Rubin is a former Pentagon official and is currently senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute as well as the Middle East forum. Dr. Rubin welcome.

Dr. Michael Rubin: Thank you so much.

Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury: In your recent article titled ‘Why is Bangladesh’s Nobel Peace Laureate Imprisoning Journalists’, you have cited references of Nobel laureates such as Ethiopian Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed and Burmese opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi who used Nobel Peace Prize to shield their wrongdoings. In Bangladesh, Yunus, who was seen as a progressive by the West is now proven as one of the top promoters and patrons of radical Islam, jihad and Caliphate madness. At the same time, Yunus faces numerous allegations centering his microfinance ventures, including documented allegations of fooling the world through lies.

Considering these scenarios, and gradual increase in Islamist and jihadist forces in Bangladesh, what fate actually awaits the country?

Dr. Michael Rubin: Look I’m pessimistic right now about Bangladesh unless Bangladeshis are able to take matters into their own hands and stop their own descent into a situation from which it will be near impossible to recover. When it comes to Muhammad Yunus at best, he’s naïve at best he’s providing cover for Jamaat-e-Islami. At worst he’s complicit. Now that complicity could be ideological or it could be ego-driven given his own personal history with the Awami League. When it comes to some of the journalists it also appears to be personal and when he’s imprisoning Farzana Rupa and Shakil Ahmed, it appears that he’s very critical of the fact that they understood how corrupt he actually was at the Grameen Bank. The point of this is that having a Nobel Peace Prize doesn’t immunize oneself from accountability for their own actions. Now when it comes to Jamaat-e-Islam put aside the fact that they are the only party outside the Nazi party in Germany, that was ever tried as a whole for their complicity in genocide. Put aside the fact that they are war criminals. When it comes to Jamaat-e-Islami, what I advise the United States government and I think it’s only a matter of time is that they deserve the designation of foreign terror organization, simply because of their actions objectively rather than any subjective criticism one might have towards Jamaat-e-Islami.

Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury: Dr. Rubin! Muhammad Yunus is following the trajectory of Recep Tayyip Erdogan and HTS kingpin Ahmad Al-Sharaa. Bangladeshi civil society and journalists are in peril. Meanwhile, Yunus is spending millions of dollars in running propaganda in his favor in the international media. Recently he has publicly admitted of asking the UN Secretary-General to help him in fighting “disinformation and fake news in the international media” against his regime.

We understand he definitely has asked António Guterres about Indian media. Also, maybe your article in the 1945 and many other critical articles. So, what I mean, United Nations Secretary General now helping caliphate monger Yunus in fighting “disinformation”. How do you see such disturbing scenarios?

Dr. Michael Rubin: First of all Salah Uddin, you started out with two examples Ahmad Al-Sharaa in Syria and also Recep Tayyip Erdogan. Of course, was famous for saying democracy is like a street car, you ride it as far as you need and then you step off. I’ll come back to Recep Erdogan in a second. I want to give another example and that would be of Ayatollah Rohullah Khomeini in the run up to Iran’s Islamic revolution. Now many of your audience realize that before Khomeini returned to Iran, he lived in France for a year and when he was in France he would often meet with journalists and he would tell the journalists and he would tell the western officials what they wanted to hear. So for example he declared repeatedly to news agencies like the Associated Press or newspapers like the Washington Times or Le Monde in France that and I quote “I have no interest in personal power I’m too old to wield power”. And he assembled around him a number of technocrats many left-leaning economists one of whom for example was Abolhassan Bani-Sadr.

As soon as Ayatollah Khomeini came to power and he was able to consolidate power, he no longer needed the useful idiot. He no longer needed Bani-Sadr and he exiled Bani-Sadr to France. Muhammad Yunus is Jamaat-e-Islam’s Boni-Sadr. He’s being a useful idiot and Jamaat-e-Islam doesn’t care about him. They don’t care about the Grameen Bank. They don’t care about his legal woes. All they want is a western leaning face – an unelected face in order to have time to consolidate their power in a way where they will never have to contest elections again. So that is where I worry with regard to Muhammad Yunus and Jamaat-e-Islam. Now when it comes to the United Nations look Muhammad Yunus can complain to the United Nations all he wants. He can complain to the Secretary General. But that’s not the Secretary General’s job.

Muhammad Yunus has got to start respecting the people of Bangladesh because the only people whose votes matter are the people of Bangladesh. Now Muhammad Yunus is an unelected figure, and here we see rumors that he’s trying to prevent the Awami League from contesting elections. I was in Bangladesh for the 2008 elections. I was in Chittagong and Dhaka as an international election observer. And I understand that much happened with regard to Sheikh Hasina over the last 15 years before the riots this summer.

And those riots weren’t organic there was actually outside involvement in them as well. But Bangladeshis are able to criticize Sheikh Hasina there. She was not perfect. She became more autocratic with time. But that doesn’t mean that you can eviscerate the Awami League. It doesn’t mean that you can deny the Bangladeshi people a choice for what the Awami League stand for secularism – for rule of law. I’m a Republican in the United States. I don’t agree with President Trump, that doesn’t mean that I would want to ban the whole Republican Party or that I’d even want to ban Donald Trump, because that’s not how democracy works.

António Guterres the Secretary General of the United Nations should understand this. And Muhammad Yunus needs to understand that the only constituency that matters are the Bangladeshis. Not some bureaucrat sitting in New York City.

Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury: But Dr. Rubin, you see Muhammad Yunus is not only an illegal leader of an illegitimate pro-caliphate regime. He is also inclined with Hefazat-e-Islam. Al-Qaeda and Islamic State and Hamas all his allies in Bangladesh. So with this situation, now he is not only trying to destroy Awami-League which is impossible, he is also trying to kill Sheikh Hasina judicially or extra-judicially, and under such scenario as you have been to Bangladesh as an esteemed election observer, and you are one of the top most research scholars in the world, how do you assess this. Also, Awami-League being a very large party now they are not even having a spokesperson. The entire party system has gone underground despite the fact, Awami-League has – out of the 120 million voters – 45 million voters in Bangladesh. It is a very large and ancient historic political party. How do you see this situation for Awami-League that it has gone underground – there is no spokesperson of this party and even Awami-League is failing to counter the lies and propaganda of Yunus which he is continuing in the western media by spending millions of dollars?

Dr. Michael Rubin: Awami-League silence right now is a symptom of the violence they face in Bangladeshi society. It’s a symptom of what Jamaat-e-Islami and Hizb-Ut [Hizb-Ut-Tahrir] and other groups represent. Why are people afraid in Bangladesh, because they understand the violence which many of these groups Jamaat-e-Islami and more violent parties more extremist even parties represent, they pose a real threat. The fact of the matter is you can’t be a Democrat and endorse Al-Qaeda groups. You can’t be a Democrat and want the Islamic State to win. That’s the situation we’re seeing now. Muhammad Yunus is a very malignant figure simply because he’s providing cover. And I hate to say this in Europe in the United States in many other countries people may think of Muhammad Yunus as a Nobel Prize winner and they may look at his face and say he doesn’t look like an Islamist. But what he’s doing is 10 times more dangerous. Because he’s providing the cover for the Islamists which are integrating and penetrating deeply into society. Now what we’ve seen in certain places is that once you have the Islamists take hold even for a short period of time, they don’t believe in democracy as Recep Erdogan said, “I am the servant of Shariah” as he said he doesn’t like democracy as it is like a street car. He’s – it’s a cynical ploy and in a situation like that let me just look at Pakistan for a second. When you look at Pakistan from the 1950s there were Hindu holidays which were national holidays. There were Christian holidays which were national holidays. There was a broad if you will tolerance. You didn’t have the application of so-called blasphemy laws in order to punish religious minorities or political opponents. Now that Pakistan has fully radicalized especially after the 1971 genocide in Bangladesh, when the Inter-Service Intelligence agency radicalized the country. They did it cynically so that people wouldn’t start speaking about ethnicity and language and ethnic identity. That Islamism and an extreme view of it would be the glue that would hold society together. The ISI cynically played this and they’ve never been able to get the wildfire back under control. That’s what Jamaat-e-Islami and Muhammad Yunus are doing in Bangladesh. They are starting a wildfire and it’s going to burn out of control. That’s why their actions are so dangerous.

Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury: Dr. Rubin, in your article you have called upon Secretary of the State Marco Rubio to immediately slap Global Magnitsky Act sanctions on Muhammad Yunus and not giving him opportunity of using his Nobel Peace Prize as shield for cover of his pogroms, press repression and general erosion of human rights. Will you please elaborate this and do you think really Secretary of State Rubio may do this on Yunus?

Dr. Michael Rubin: Okay well. First of all, as you know what Magnitsky sanctions are named for. They are named for a Russian dissident journalist lawyer who was killed in prison. Now when it comes to Global Magnitsky Act sanctions, what they do is they target abusers of human rights and international law in that regard. Now what better – I mean Muhammad Yunus may be famous but fame doesn’t make one immune. The fact of the matter is you have Farzana Rupa you have Shakil Akmed – you have journalists who wrote for the New York Times. And what does Muhammad Yunus do? He imprisons them. And when it comes to Farzana Rupa and Shakil Akmed he won’t even allow their minor daughter to see them. But they’re only two of a thousand and he’s accused these journalists of murder. That’s nonsense. No one believes it. Their crime was conducting journalism and criticizing Muhammad Yunus and his agenda, and so he Muhammad Yunus becomes the typical abuser that global Magnitsky Act sanctions apply to. Now too often in Washington, we don’t think much about Bangladesh. Officially we’re consumed with China with Israel with Iran with France with Germany and Poland. Bangladesh doesn’t enter our news cycle. But the fact that Marco Rubio and Tulsi Gabbard are now talking about trouble in Bangladesh, means that it’s starting to enter the radar screen the awareness of American officials. And if it’s entering American officials’ awareness it’s entering European officials’ awareness too. So, you get a situation where perhaps Muhammad Yunus thinks that he can pull a fast one that people are ignoring what he’s doing but people are starting to wake up and if Muhammad Yunus isn’t careful he’s going to spend his last days in jail.

Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury: Dr Rubin, my last question is – in the recent times particularly since August 5th Jihadist Coup in Bangladesh, Palestinian and Hamas flags are increasingly seen on the streets. At the same time Islamists are publicly disrespecting President Trump Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Why the Trump administration is ignoring this factor?

Dr. Michael Rubin: Well look I mean ultimately Bangladesh can choose its own foreign policy and on something as difficult as the Israeli-Palestinian dispute. They can choose their sides. That’s not the problem. The problem is and so the United States will let and will be happy with Bangladesh as a democratic Bangladesh, choosing whatever foreign policy it wants. The problem with Muhammad Yunus right now is by embracing terror he’s going down a slippery slope. He’s pouring gasoline on a fire. And it doesn’t matter whether it’s not that Muhammad Yunus is pro-Hamas and Muhammad Yunus is pro-terror. The same thing with regard to Hezbollah or Jamaat-e-Islami or Lashkar-e-Taiba or Al Qaeda – or any of these groups that ultimately is the problem we face and when it comes to foreign policy again Muhammad Yunus can go to China and he can embrace China but someone’s got to ask is what he’s doing good for the people of Bangladesh. After all take a look at Pakistan because of the China-Pakistan economic corridor is more than $38 billion in debt. Sri Lanka and Maldives are increasingly becoming in the Maldives case either Islamist in Sri-Lanka’s case a Chinese satropy and the fact of the matter is I’ve never thought in a country as great as Bangladesh that one man could sell out its freedom and its democracy as quickly as Muhammad Yunus has.  My only question with Muhammad Yunus is whether he’s doing it out of ego whether he’s doing it out of greed whether he’s doing it out of ideology. I suspect it’s all three.

Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury: Sir, last question. Actually, not last question, your last opinion. As a Bangladeshi, I would like to ask and as you know our newspaper is 23 years old anti-jihadist newspaper right from Bangladesh. I’d like to ask you sir that, for us the situation in Bangladesh is very suffocating because the jihadist and Islamist all around that we don’t appreciate. So just as an expert, in your opinion, I have been saying that Yunus is going to embrace the fate of Muhammad Morsi of Egypt, he will be spending his last days in prison soon and very soon. What is your opinion?

Dr. Michael Rubin: I actually agree. And first of all look, I admire you a great deal – I’m aware of your history and I am aware of what you have personally sacrificed over the years in pursuit to press freedom. So, I’m not some American speaking from Washington who’s naive about who am I talking to. And I recognize Mr. Choudhury just how much of a model you are in this regard. Now what I want to say, I agree with you. With Muhammad Morsi. But let me bring up another Egyptian example. I go to Egypt frequently and one of the things that as an analyst as a historian, I find most amazing is without doubt people rose up because they didn’t like they were frustrated with Hosni Mubarak. They were frustrated with the corruption of the Egyptian military being involved in business, and so forth. And young people thought, hey the Muslim Brotherhood represented by Muhamed Morsi – they talk about democracy. But when the young people and I’ve talked to these young people when they start going to Muslim Brotherhood meetings, they thought I’m going to be able to speak up – I’m going to be able to give my opinion. But the Muslim Brotherhood leaders said listen and repeat. They had been in the Muslim Brotherhood for 40-50 years. And they believed not in internal democracy within the Muslim Brotherhood but rather that they had earned the right to dictate to the young people. When we look at what happened in Egypt afterwards what strikes me as amazing is not the initial revolution the Arab Spring against Hosni Mubarak but the fact that Muhamed Morsi through his arrogance through his ideology through the exposure of his lies managed to spark a counterrevolution that ultimately led millions of Egyptian people who didn’t like who had participated in the Arab Spring. Muhamed Morsi drove millions of Egyptians back into the streets to basically say no we don’t want this Islamism. We don’t want this terrorism. And as you said, he ended his life in prison. My question for the Bangladeshi people is when will they see what Muhammad Yunus agenda is. You see the terrorists taking off their masks. You understand as in Pakistan that there is no going back once you unleash, once you open this Pandora’s box. So ultimately the fate of Bangladesh is now – it’s going to be determined now and it’s going to be determined when the people of Bangladesh take back their country – take back their democracy and tell this 84-year-old grifter no more.

Please follow Blitz on Google News Channel