| by Kazi
Anwarul Masud
( December 27,
2012, Dhaka, Sri Lanka Guardian) Situation in Bangladesh is moving
towards an explosion due in part to violence let loose by the Jamaat-e-Islami
demanding the release of their leaders now being tried for crimes against
humanity committed during the liberation war in 1971 in collaboration with the
occupying Pakistani army.
While the
opposition Bangladesh Nationalist Party(BNP) publicly does not oppose the trial
of collaborators they have raised questions about the way the trial is being
conducted though distinct from the Nuremberg to the trials at The Hague the
accused if convicted in Bangladesh would have recourse to appeal against
convictions.
BNP’s main
agitation’s focus is the demand for
reinstitution of caretaker government for holding the next general
election in 2013. It may be recalled that the caretaker system had been
declared illegal by the Supreme Court and abolished by the Parliament through
an amendment to the Constitution. BNP’s agitation has been violent as were the government’s actions to maintain law and
order during the agitations. BNP maintains that governmental police actions
have infringed on their fundamental right to protest.
This
unending struggle between the two
factions is adding to the general
public’s discomfiture and proving costly to the business community affecting trade and
export of the country. Though the World Bank in its latest report has praised
Bangladesh for registering 6% growth despite global economic downturn
structural problems remain arresting socio-economic development of the
country. In Global Competitive Index
for 2012-2013 published by the World Economic Forum Bangladesh has been placed
at 118 out of 144 countries surveyed mainly due to inadequate infrastructure,
corruption and lack of access to finance. If the situation does not improve
chances of foreign direct investment, essential for economic development of
cash strapped country would be difficult to attract.
Added is the
strained owner-worker relationship currently being displayed in the country’s
Ready Made Garment Sector, a remarkable area contributing to growth of GDP
and a significant foreign exchange
earner. The trust deficit people have in
the administration has been demonstrated by The Rule of Law Index for 2012 of
the World Justice Project that has put Bangladesh at 87th position in limited
government powers, 89th in absence of corruption, 72nd in order and security,
87th in fundamental rights, 89th in open government, 90th in regulatory
enforcement, 97th in civil justice and 83rd in criminal justice.
The country
scores poorly in government accountability and administrative agencies and
courts are extremely inefficient and corrupt. The student and youth wings of
major political parties are reportedly engaged in illegal money making projects tolerated and
in some cases encouraged by the ruling party, whichever remains in power. In
exchange they are used as musclemen to subdue their opponents. Student politics is rarely based on of principles
and more on money paid due to services rendered.
A case in point
is the ruthless murder of Biswajit Das, an innocent tailor, who found himself
in the midst of armed cadre of a political party who killed him on the mistaken
belief that he was party to agitation called for opposition political combine
against the government. The people throughout the country rose up in disgust
demanding exemplary punishment be meted out to the alleged killers. This
incident along with several others in recent past has highlighted regression of
communicative action essential for the survival of democracy.
Most political
scientists and philosophers (German sociologist and philosopher Jurgen Habermas
is prominent among them) consider unfettered communication among equally
informed citizens necessary to build an
informed and consensus based society in
which the minority’s views are also considered. In such a society James
Madison’s advice is critical to rein in
the majority so that their will is not imposed on the minority which could lead
to identity politics to the detriment of the growth of democratic polity
especially in multicultural society.
This term
“multiculturalism” has become debatable of late and Oxford Professor Timothy
Garton Ash has suggested that the “term should be consigned to the conceptual
dustbin of history”. In the current global narrative after 9/11
multiculturalism has become synonymous with the Muslim “threat” in Europe. For
Bangladesh fortunately overwhelming part of the population having same
ethnicity and religion persecution of the minority, though not totally absent,
is a rare phenomenon. But we have a no less greater problem in the form of
acute intolerance of opposing views leading to senseless violence.
A case in point,
as mentioned earlier, is the demand for election under caretaker government
that is totally opposed by the ruling party. Public debate on this issue
resulting in violence has produced
concern and anxiety both at home and abroad. Foreign friends of Bangladesh and
our citizens alike are repeatedly requesting the feuding
political parties to sit for dialogue to thrash out their differences and
relieve the country of an uncertain future.
One wonders whether the inability of our politicians has its roots in
our antecedent.
Some social
workers believe that wherever in the world, people have developed through structured
educational systems; they are more inclined to continue along that path. Those
people who have developed within tribal cultures are less inclined to adapt to
formal educational systems. A survey of people from various regions of the
world would show a significant difference in their development. Those people
who came from structured societies had significant social, cultural and
economic adaptability. On the other hand, those people who came from primitive
tribal cultures have been more adaptable to the slum and ghetto type
environment.
One may trash
this point of view on the ground that unlike some countries Bangladesh never
had tribal system and as such primitive traits of tribalism cannot exist in our
mental makeup. But if “tribalism” were to be interpreted as akin to nepotism,
districtism, crony capitalism, blind loyalty to political party and its leader,
and other narrow views clouding our judgment then one may not be too far off in
tracing the root cause of our political leaders’ inability to compromise, and
more so, when such compromise can lead to loss of state power.
Tragedy of the
people of Bangladesh lies in the fact that despite repeated broken promises by
political leaders they have little alternative but to vote to power the same
set of politicians, albeit of different combines, because rule by
extra-constitutional forces in
Bangladesh on several occasions did not produce the desired results. They too
were allegedly corrupt while during their rule the people lost their political
liberty. Then again unlimited power given to the chief executive under
democratic system in developing countries virtually devoid of checks and
balance bestows upon him/her almost regal power to reward loyalty and deny
“rewards” to holders of independent thought regarded as “disloyalty” to the
leader.
Bangladesh does
not have the American system of the Congressional scrutiny and approval of
nominations by the President to important positions of authority. Though
undeniably in certain cases politics intrudes into this process and excellent
candidates may be rejected but such cases are rare. A case in point is the
withdrawal by Ambassador Susan Rice from the race of the next Secretary of
State as she felt if nominated her approval by the Senate may be delayed due to
faux pas committed over the armed assault and the murder of Ambassador Stevens
in Benghazi. But the possibility that the next Secretary of State may be John
Kerry, a distinguished politician with long experience in foreign affairs,
would more than compensate the loss of Susan Rice.
The point being
driven at is that in the absence of institutional checks and balance in
parliamentary system in fragile
democracies the chances of abuse of power by the duly elected leader yet
exercising powers of an absolute monarch cannot be discounted. Such possibility
was evident when the military backed government popularly known as 1/11 tried
to implement minus-2 formula aimed at removing from politics the two
leaders-namely the present Prime Minister and the present Leader of the
Opposition and create a new political party. The endeavor failed miserably and
in the general elections that followed the two main political parties was
returned by the electorate- one to power and the other to the opposition. This
proved that the success of General Ziaur Rahman in establishing Bangladesh
Nationalist Party and that of General Husain Mohammad Ershad in establishing
Jatyo Party could not be repeated by the military backed government after 1/11.
One can account
for the failure of the Moin-Fakhruddin government to recreate Ziaur
Rahman-Ershad scenario by the fact that both General Zia and General Ershad
retained power much longer than Moin-Fakhruddin duo. Another factor could be
that the establishment of BAKSAL in place of multi-party system was
controversial. This compression of liberty in no way reflects that fact
that the
assassination of the Father of the Nation in August 1975 had shocked the
entire population of Bangladesh and the trial and conviction of some of the
killers have been universally welcomed by the people.
Ziaur Rahman got
the lease of life through his rehabilitation of the Jamaat-e- Islam political
party and the Rajakars who had fled the country after liberation and the
restoration of citizenship to the Jamaat leader Ghulam Azam and subsequent
inclusion of Jamaat leaders in the
cabinet by his widow who became the Prime Minister of Bangladesh. General
Ershad also dallied with the Islam-pasand political parties to remain in power.
In short both the BNP and Jatyo Party survived through political association
with religion-based parties and by playing with the religious sentiment of the
people. Contrarily the capture of power by Mionuddin-Fakhruddin duo, though
initially acquiesced by the people lost popular support, particularly of the
youth, due to their corruption-ridden administration.
The people also
did not like the minus-2 formula and the peoples’ dislike was eminently proved
by the overwhelming victory of Awami League in the election of 2008. But for
the interruptions by extra-constitutional forces Bangladesh alternated between
the rule by either Awami League or the BNP. The initial periods of these
extra-constitutional rules were not disliked by the people mainly because of
peoples’ perception of corruption by the parties in power and their
disillusionment with broken promises. Added was the element of the absence of
transformational leaders like the Father
of the Nation in the politics of Bangladesh.
Current
political leaders appear to be less dedicated to peoples’ welfare and more
engaged in conduct of public affairs for private gains. Since public perception
is more important in politics than reality our politicians have a grave
responsibility to convince the people of
the fallacy of their perception. But then it is difficult to guarantee
that extra-constitutional forces would not stage a comeback. Historically
autocracies have emerged in modern times (barring absolute monarchies of the
past) due to ideological reasons (e.g. Communism) with a strong selectorate( e.g. army where a
group is not solely dependent on a single leader and the group is capable of
replacing a poorly performing leader or Central Committee/Politburo in
communist system) if people are dissatisfied with the elected government’s
inability to provide economic goods.
From Brazil(
1965-1974) to Chile of Pinochet to Salazar’s Portugal to Franco’s Spain to
Pakistan from the late fifties and
Bangladesh in the late seventies and eighties have seen autocrats ruling for
years. In China, for example, the
impressive growth of the economy along with attachment with ideology have strengthened the grip of the Communist Party
over the people making it possible for a strong elite to co-opt dissidents. “…Frequently popular uprisings
are co-opted or taken over by the members of the existing elite. Sometimes this
is defensive, to ensure the elites’ survival, after the sacrifice of a few
leaders … other times, as recently in Kyrgyzstan, the revolt was simply an
extra-constitutional, intra-elite, reshuffle”( Nick Grono of International
Crisis Group). Nick Grono suggests that the army, once in power, should be got rid of as soon
as possible because “all too frequently Western nations seem comfortable
with this, as the militaries are known entities, create a semblance of order
and normality, and their commanders have often been trained at Leavenworth or
Sandhurst. But more often than not, the military just ends up undermining
democratic development, as in Pakistan.”
It is difficult
to believe that the major players in this region and in the international
community would accept an extra-constitutional government in Bangladesh.
Western nations, in particular the USA, have already expressed their hope for a
free and fair election that will result in the formation of a democratically
elected government in Bangladesh. President Obama was applauded by his audience
at the Cairo University in June 2009 for his unstinted commitment “to
governments that reflect the will of the people” and of his belief “that peace is
unstable where citizens are denied the right to speak freely or worship as they
please; choose their own leaders or assemble without fear”.
As the situation
in Bangladesh is dissimilar to the one in Pakistan bedeviled by terrorism it is
unlikely that the Western powers and our closest neighbor will support a
military installed government in this country. The question, however, remains
as to how long friends of Bangladesh will retain patience if the two major
political combines refuse to listen to their advice and that of the people of
the country to the feuding parties to come to an understanding on the
modalities of holding the next elections due next year.
Will the ruling
party allow a civil war like situation
to evolve in Bangladesh? Can the ruling party be confident that they can
pull off an election held on their terms
without the risk of a large scale chaos in the country? Can the ruling party be
confident that the opposition parties will not get peoples’ support for
repeated hartals( closure of business, offices and roads and completely halting
transportation of vehicles of all types)
though such political actions will mean untold suffering to the people? Can the
ruling party be confident that the amendment to the Constitution declaring the
caretaker government illegal will have the support of the common people who are
not well versed in law and of the sanctity of the judgment of the Supreme Court on this issue?
It is difficult to answer many of these questions yet the politico-economic
future of the country may depend on satisfactory answers.
Then again
though the chances of a Syrian or Arab Spring situation in Bangladesh is not
envisaged because of difference in the level of violence and the nature and
subjects of protest one has to take into account Jamaat-e-Islami’s destructive
agitation that, many suspect, have external financial support and possible
rightist-conservative internal support.
There is already demand of the left leaning political parties and by the
liberals for banning religion-based politics in Bangladesh. Given the religious
extremist Islamists’ armed violence and consolidation in some parts of the country in the past,
denied by then government in power, the left-center Awami League defeated these
forces and hanged some of their leaders.
But the recent
violence let loose by the student wing of the Islamist Jamaat-e-Islami party
has caused concern in some quarters about the possibility of the resurgence of
Islamism in Bangladesh. The international community would be well advised to
take note before such a movement gathers momentum and support from among deeply
religious, albeit moderate Muslims, of Bangladesh. If the conservative
rightists were to capture power on the strength of negative vote against Awami
League in the next elections then JI would certainly form a coalition with BNP
and such a combine could open Bangladesh territory for trans-border terrorism
from Pakistan into India notwithstanding the leader of the opposition’s
commitment given to the Indian leaders during her recent visit to India that
Bangladesh would not be used as transit
point for anti-Indian terrorists.
The failure of
the Indian authorities to deliver on the commitments made during Bangladesh
Prime Minister’s visit to Delhi and the Indian Prime Minister’s visit to Dhaka
has frustrated people across the political spectrum in Bangladesh. It appears
that in the face of opposition by BJP and Trinamul Congress on ratification of
Land Boundary Agreement and apportioning of Teesta River water it is unlikely
that these two issues can be solved before the general elections in India
expected to be held in 2014. Conservative rightists and Islamists may exploit
this situation to put Awami League government on the defensive on
Indo-Bangladesh relations by pointing out their failure to secure legitimate
interest of Bangladesh from India.
Increasingly it
may become difficult for the government to convince the public that maintaining
best of relations with India will serve the best interests of the country. As
both countries will have to face the electorate within the next two years it
would be prudent for India to come forward with positive attitude on deliverable
issues so that trust deficit of the skeptical Bangladeshis are removed and they
are convinced that Indian difficulty in
delivering the ratification of the Land Boundary Agreement and on the sharing
of the Teesta water may be removed once the Indian elections are over. This
optimism is contingent upon the UPA government winning the next elections with
convincing majority with parties sharing the present government’s policy
towards Bangladesh.
In short
Indo-Bangladesh relations may play a part in the Bangladesh elections next
year. Yet like in most countries foreign policy will not
determine the future course of politics in Bangladesh. Determining factor will
be the compromise formula on the mechanism of holding the next elections. Other
elements are likely to be poverty reduction, corruption scandals, price rise of
both food and non-food items, success and failures of the government in
education, health, disaster management, agriculture, manpower export and
remittance, law and order situation, religious extremism etc. In short, people
may ask themselves whether they are better off today than they were before the
Mahajot government was voted to power.
Like the last
time the youth is likely to be a major factor in determining who will win the
elections and consequently extent of youth unemployment should be watched ( a
study reveals that Young people aged 15 to 29 make up one fourth of
Bangladesh’s total population. Of 85 million working-age people in the country,
41 % are youths. Some 1.5 million young Bangladeshis are unemployed and 8.5
million are underemployed in the sense of not having work that suits their
skills). In gist economic condition and
law and order situation are likely to top the concerns of the people on the
election day.
Subscribe Us
 Situation in Bangladesh is moving towards an e...){kind=link}