Power
Politics In Bangladesh
By Taj Hashmi
16 November, 2006
Countercurrents.org
After witnessing ten weeks of
political standoff, rioting and killing of more than forty political
activists on the street by members of political rivals, Bangladesh is
now under Emergency rule. On January 11th, President Iajuddin Ahmed
declared the State of Emergency as the country was heading towards total
anarchy. The Emergency is the outcome of the Awami League-led 16-Party
Grand Alliance’s stubborn opposition to taking part in the parliamentary
elections scheduled for January 22nd on the pretext that the elections
would not be free and fair for various reasons.
One wonders if the State
of Emergency by curtailing several fundamental rights of the people
will finally lead to free and fair elections, participated by the major
political parties and acceptable to all at home and abroad. One is,
however, sure about one thing. Unless both the main political rivals,
the Awami League- and BNP-led alliances, are convinced of winning the
majority of seats in the Parliament, there will not be any elections
in the over-polarized polity of Bangladesh.
Here elections neither reflect
people’s verdict through the ballot nor are harbingers of democracy.
In accordance with the winner-takes-all rule, winning elections is a
major step towards grabbing political power. With power come wealth,
fame and influence. The average voters, being poor clients in the patron-client
hierarchy, are too weak to go against their patron. Having more in common
with (rural) community rather than with (urban) society, Bangladesh
polity is promoting the politics of faction-ridden, quasi-tribal, village
or pre-modern peasant community. Its political culture is “pre-political”
by nature, violent and fatalist at the same time; lack of trust and
mutual respect being the norm.
And the faction-ridden Bangladesh
community provides the smooth playground for the crafty faction chiefs.
They take part in elections, making false promises on phony programs.
Since “politics”, or “rajniti “ in the common
parlance, literally means a prerogative of the raja (king) or rich and
powerful in Bangladesh, the average voters do not mind rallying around
their respective patrons while the latter are busy playing the game
of politics. Besides getting some crumbs and immediate gratifications,
voters also hope (albeit faintly) that some future benefits might come
in the event of their patrons winning the elections. The widening gaps
between the rich and the poor and the institutionalized corruption have
turned people apathetic to politics and making corruption a way of life.
Despite their lack of political
consciousness, Bangladeshis often love to congratulate themselves for
being the “most politically conscious people” in the Subcontinent.
However, those familiar with the history, politics and culture of Bangladesh
know that the bragging is just another Bengali hyperbole. Living under
corrupt and inefficient civil / military oligarchs, the so-called “politically
conscious” Bangladeshis glorify their respective political patrons,
often members of the various political “dynasties” as the
only legitimate rulers of the country.
These political “dynasties”,
some more corrupt than others; represent three past leaders –
Mujib, Zia and Ershad. Apparently, two not-so-educated matriarchs and
the discredited and corrupt former military dictator, Ershad himself,
run these “dynasties”, euphemistically as political parties.
The Awami League, BNP and Jatiya Party represent the Mujibites, Ziaites
and Ershadites, respectively. These parties are conglomerates of political
opportunists, devoid of ethics and run like corporations or personal
fiefdoms on dynastic lines.
Till before the Emergency,
Bangladesh was under a siege of political unrest, economic stagnation
and almost on the verge of a civil war a la post-Saddam Iraq. Ominously,
the Awami-BNP fault line, not that different from the Shia-Sunni cleavage
in Iraq, has more to do with class than with ideology. Traditionally,
the Awami League represents the lower middle classes and small town
“vernacular elite” belonging to the petty bourgeois classes.
On the other hand, the BNP is mainly run by scions of the traditional
Muslim elite (former pro-Pakistani Muslim Leaguers) and members of the
upper echelons of the nouveau riche. While the former is widely known
to be “secular”, (former) “socialist”, “Bangali”
and “soft on India”, the latter is considered “communal
/ political Islamist”, proponent of “Bangladeshi Nationalism”
to differentiate Bangladeshis from Indian Bengalis, and “soft
on Pakistan”. To some critics, BNP stands for “Bangladesh
Now Pakistan”.
However, the Mujibites are
not lagging behind in this regard. They have been “Pakistanizing”
and “Iraqizing” the country by promoting political Islam
and a reign of terror by inciting killing of political rivals and destroying
public and private properties in the name of promoting democracy. Of
late the so-called ideological and class differences between the Mujibites
and Ziaites are waning. As the Awami League is turning more Islamist
over night so is the BNP busy making room for lower middle classes and
convicted murderers within its folds. The recent Awami and Islamist
Khilafat Majlis MOU, signed December 23rd, favouring Shariah, “Blasphemy
Law” and “qualified” mullahs’ right to issue
fatwa, may be cited in this regard. While the Ershadites and several
petty “leftist” and Islamist groups are in alliance with
the Mujibites, other petty “dynasties” and Islamists, especially
the Jamaat-i-Islami, have thrown their lot with the BNP for political
dividends. As reported in daily Prothom Alo (January 15, 2007), while
the BNP advanced twenty million taka to get Ershad’s support in
the Elections, the Awami camp succeeded in winning over the former dictator
by offering him even a higher pay off.
Meanwhile, due to the unbridled
corruption of the immediate past BNP-led coalition government (2001-2006),
some local and foreign analysts have classified some of the top brasses
of the party, including the “crown prince”, among the richest
men in Asia. One may surmise, if a short span of five years as a leader
in a ruling party in poor Bangladesh can turn someone into one of the
richest men in Asia, there is every reason as to why the potentially
corrupt elements in the opposition camp would leave no stone unturned
to grab power. Once elected and installed to power, the ruling parties
legitimizes the electoral process as “free and fair”. And
as it is happening since 1991, the losing parties consider the elections
fraudulent or rigged and the elected government illegitimate; hence
undesirable.
Recently, politically aroused
masses, along with politically motivated students, workers, lawyers,
lawmakers and university teachers in the name of holding free and fair
elections left no institutions unscathed. Some pro-Awami activists wanted
to physically assault the chief justice for rejecting their plea to
bar the President of the Republic from simultaneously holding the Chief
Adviser's position. Some senior lawyers literally chased the attorney
general and vandalized property on the premises of the Supreme Court.
The peasant rusticity, vulgarity and intolerance are well-pronounced
in some politicians’ abusive language and mutual name calling.
The two matriarchs of the Awami and BNP “dynasties” not
only do not talk to each other, but they also publicly vilify each other
as “murderer”, “foreign agent”, “thief”
and what not! Sheikh Hasina has been much more offensive and indecent
than her BNP counterpart. She even loutishly labeled President Iajuddin
as “Yesuddin” for his alleged loyalty to the BNP to rig
the elections against the Awamis. Hasina’s crude adherents simply
love this pejorative.
It is unbelievably true that
the country, which witnessed elections, acceptable to both the winners
and losers during the British and Pakistani periods, cannot even get
an accurate voter list and neutral government officials to conduct elections.
Advisers of the weird, said to be fool-proof, “neutral and non-partisan”
caretaker government are not free from criticism either. This is only
foolish to expect that any such unelected and unaccountable government
would ensure free and fair elections. The very concept of a caretaker
government is a by-product of the prevalent lack of mutual trust and
respect. The predominance of the lumpen and petty bourgeois classes
in the arena of Bangladesh politics, having peasants and lumpen proletariat
classes as their active followers, is bound to nurture mistrust, nihilism
and conspiracy theories. As the typical peasant does not trust and respect
his immediate neighbours and is only willing to respect a rich and powerful
non-peasant as his patron; under the pervasive peasant culture, the
average Bangladeshi loves to believe that some hidden hands are pulling
the invisible string to his detriment. The ubiquitous “we-against-them”
mentality is the mother of the caretaker government and what followed
in its wake since its inception in 1996.
In view of the above, undoubtedly
the BNP as the immediate past ruling party appointed loyal officials
in key positions to manipulate the election results. And with a few
exceptions, most BNP lawmakers, ministers and party officials are alleged
to have embezzled millions from the state coffer. However, this is also
true that the Awami League during its tenure as the ruling party (1996-2001)
did not promote honesty as its top leaders were widely known for promoting
corruption, nepotism and terrorism. What the party did while in the
opposition was equally heinous. Sheikh Hasina made history by rejecting
the nationally and globally acceptable poll results in 1991 and 2001
as by-products of “subtle” and “crude” rigging,
respectively. After the Ziaite Khaleda Zia became the Prime Minister
in 1991, Hasina publicly stated : “I won’t let Khaleda rule
in peace for a day”. And she kept her words. She organized almost
a non-stop five-year-long country-wide agitations, general strikes and
blockade to overthrow an elected government. During the Awami rule (1996-2001)
the BNP played the dirty villainous role. The Awamis again resorted
to violence and vandalism to overthrow the BNP-led Coalition government
for the second time (2001-2006).
The Awami opportunism, as
mentioned above, is reflected in its recent signing of the MOU with
Islamist Khelafat Majlis by discarding its fifty-two years of secular
traditions favouring all sorts of obscurantism in the name of Islam.
Embracing Ershad, a former convicted dictator, as a comrade-in-arms
in its “march towards democracy” is yet another example
of Awami Machiavellianism. However, the height of Awami opportunism
and bankruptcy was its volte-face. One week after deciding to contest
the parliamentary elections on December 26 (emboldened by getting the
Ershadites as allies), on January 3rd 2007 the Mujibites decided to
oppose the Elections scheduled for January 22nd; the specious grounds
being faulty voter list and “unconstitutional” nature of
the caretaker government. No major changes took place between December
26 and January 3 vis-à-vis the voter list to precipitate the
sudden change of mood in the Awami camp. Only one major shift had forced
the Awamis to change their mind. Meanwhile, the judiciary had disqualified
Ershad to remain a candidate in the Elections as more criminal charges
had been brought against him. So, the Awami resumption of political
agitation to boycott the polls was nothing but a badly written play
staged by unskilled actors.
In sum, the country with
all the potentials to emerge as another Asian Tiger in the next twenty
years or so is in total mess. Despite its fertile land, better land-man
ratio than that of Japan and South Korea, resolute and hard-working
people, plenty of water and almost untapped natural resources (natural
gas and hydro-energy) Bangladesh remains the poorest in the Subcontinent.
It is also one of the most chaotic, corrupt and ungovernable countries
in the world. Since we do not believe in conspiracy theories and blaming
the victims, the poor, exploited and misled masses; we have only the
Bangladeshi political, business and professional elites to point fingers
at for what is becoming the “Bangladesh Syndrome”.
In short, the “Bangladesh
Syndrome” stands for retarded growth and prosperity and the reversal
of all that a country achieved in the last few hundred years. A country,
with the highest per capita income in Asia in 1949, except Japan’s
and Singapore’s [Department of Economic Affairs, UN, National
and Per Capita Income of Seventy Countries in 1949, New York, 1950,
pp.14-15] is one of the poorest because of its leaders. And the apathy
of the highly educated Bangladeshis from taking part in national politics
has brought the most corrupt and least competent people in the arena
of politics. Those who could not qualify for the civil and military
services, and other lucrative professions as doctors, lawyers, engineers,
college / university teachers swelled the ranks of lower court solicitors
and politicians. Of late, traders and newly emerging bankers and industrialists
have joined politics; more as an investment to make more money than
to serve the nation. Many, if not most, of them are absolutely corrupt.
Some of them have criminal records and links with the under world. Consequently
while the average Bangladeshis are getting disillusioned with “democracy”
– opinion polls suggest many of them favour a non-political caretaker
government or a state of emergency – politicians with no known
sources of income or profession and others having vested interests in
“politics”, which is now synonymous with the most lucrative
business are striving for “democracy”. The country needs
a presidential form of government with technocrats and honest leaders
as advisers / ministers. As honest and capable technocrats and professionals
cannot get elected as MPs under the prevalent political culture and
socio-economic setup, the days of running a “Westminster type”
democracy should be over in Bangladesh. There may be some light at the
end of the tunnel if the people force the existing / future government
to drive away the corrupt and evil politicians and end political “dynasties”
and their cronies for good. Otherwise Bangladesh might go the Pakistan,
and even worse, the Iraq way in the not-so-distant future.
Leave
A Comment
&
Share Your Insights