Killing For Blasphemy, Secularism, And The Fractured State Of Bangladesh
By Taj Hashmi
04 November, 2015
Countercurrents.org
Avijit Roy
They did it again. On October 31st, some unknown assailants hacked Faisal Arefin Dipan to death on October 31 at his office in Dhaka for publishing slain freethinker Avijit Roy’s book. Let’s hope, this time the killers won’t get off scot-free! And what would be even worse, the police won’t falsely incriminate some innocent people in the killing. One is not sure if the killing of ultra-secular Islamophobic writers has something to do with the rapid “Arabization” or “de-secularization” of Bangladesh. The police haven’t yet arrested anybody who attacked freethinkers like Humayun Azad in 2004, and killed another half a dozen writers, including Avijit Roy, during the last two years.
One isn’t sure who killed Dipan and injured three others. Were they simply “enemies of secularism”? Were they al Qaeda/ISIS agents? And now we are told, there are no al Qaeda/ISIS agents in Bangladesh. Does it mean some “Big Brothers” belonging to certain political parties – said to have sponsored the killing of two foreign nationals in the country last month – sponsored the latest attacks? One wonders, if we could hold some “beneficiaries” – people who are likely to benefit most from these attacks – responsible for these attacks! As one may impute the surge of Islamist terrorism in Bangladesh to the rapid “de-secularization” process, this piece is an appraisal of society and politics in the country to find out if it has become less secular than before, and if the killings have anything to do with the diminution of secularism.
There are two schools of thought on the utility of secularism in Bangladesh, and two sets of opinion on the state of secularism in the country. While adherents of secularism believe Bangladesh is fast becoming less secular; on the contrary, those who hate secularism, argue the country has become more secular – meaning drifting away from Islam – hence, “Islam is in danger” in Bangladesh! Interestingly, only Islam and Muslims seem to be relevant to the debate on the state of secularism in the country. Hindus, Buddhists, Christians and others being so “insignificant” and marginalized, nobody seems to bother about what they feel about living in a country where Islam is officially the “State Religion” since 1988.
Here, the adherents of secularism may be divided into two groups: Those having limited or no understanding of secularism – its philosophy and history as it evolved in the West – nevertheless, promote “secularism” out of love for the concept, or out of sheer political opportunism; and others, who understand what secularism is all about, sincerely want to live in a secular polity where religion would play no role in the running of the state machinery, including the executive, legislature and judiciary. As mentioned above, the politically motivated “secular” groups and individuals are noncommittal, opportunistic, and unpredictable.
As things have evolved in Bangladesh during the last four decades, some “secular” leaders shunned “secularism” altogether, and joined the Mushtaque regime in 1975, which overnight turned Bangladesh into an “Islamic Republic”. Many avowedly “secular” politicians and their supporters remained indifferent to military dictator Ershad’s illegal insertion of Islam as the “State Religion” clause in the Constitution in 1988. Surprisingly, some of them even formally promised to introduce Shariah Law in Bangladesh, as appeared in an MOU they signed with some Islamist political parties in 2006.
In view of the vacillating and unpredictable behaviour of most politicians with regard to secularism and liberal democracy in the country, the question, “Has Bangladesh become less secular than before”? seems gratuitous and problematic. Nevertheless, it’s an important issue. Although it is likely to remain a mystery as to who have been killing secular bloggers, and foreign nationals in the country, it’s time to resolve if secularism, democracy, development, and the overall security of the country are at stake. Now, the important questions are: Are the killings of secular bloggers, publishers and foreign nationals interlinked? Are some beneficiaries of a destabilized Bangladesh behind the killings? Are Islamist terrorists hell-bend to destroy secular ideas and institutions?
Another pertinent question could be: Was secularism ever entrenched in Bangladesh? We know secularism is a Western concept, evolved after the Renaissance, Reformation, Enlightenment, and the political and industrial revolutions in Western Europe and America. A nation can’t become secular and democratic overnight merely by proclaiming “secularism” and “democracy” as fundamental state ideologies, as Bangladesh did soon after the Liberation. The main reasons why democracy goes out of business and secularism falters in Bangladesh partially lie in its long semi-feudal and colonial traditions, but politicians’ and elite’s opportunistic use of religion and democratic institutions are mainly responsible for faltering democracy and secularism in the country. These pre-modern traditions promote religiosity, superstitions, and inequality; and restrict literacy, creativity and freethinking, and political use of religion delegitimizes secularism.
Then again, secularism was never integral to the Bengali Muslim psyche, and not even to the Liberation War. Only a miniscule minority of leaders, intellectuals and students – mostly Left-oriented – aspired for secularism in independent Bangladesh, to signal a departure from the communal state ideology of Pakistan. However, various internal and external factors – including bad governance and growing Indian hegemony – jolted people’s confidence in unfamiliar concepts of secularism and socialism.
As Indian journalist Basant Chatterjee wrote an eyewitness account of Bangladesh (Inside Bangladesh Today) in 1973, soon after the Liberation, the poor and war-ravaged Bangladesh had virtually turned itself into “Muslim Bangla”, avowedly Islamic, anti-Hindu and anti-India. And the rest is history of further Islamization and de-secularization of the polity. We know, while erstwhile secular countries in the Muslim World – e.g. Turkey, Tunisia, and Algeria – are fast Islamizing themselves, a pre-modern Muslim-majority country like Bangladesh can’t reverse the process to become secular overnight. Secularism is a state of mind, like democracy, it can’t be just grafted on a polity by merely making constitutional amendments.
The two diametrically opposite political streams in the over-polarized polity of Bangladesh –
supporters of the ruling Awami League and their opponents from the BNP-Jamaat-e-Islami bloc – have been playing the cat and mouse game over secularism for the last three decades. While leaders and followers of the Awami bloc portray their political rivals as “anti-Liberation”, “Pro-Pakistani” and “pro-al-Qaeda-pro-Taliban”, BNP-Jamaat adherents never shy away from portraying their Awami rivals as “anti-Islamic” and “pro-Indian”. The upshot is the fractured state of Bangladesh, where leaders and followers are engaged in the futile debate on secularism, and the lack of patriotism among their political rivals.
The saddest part of the story is that, while the newly emerged Anasarullah Bangla Team, purportedly an affiliate of the Al-Qaeda in the Indian Subcontinent (AQIS), has claimed it was behind the killing of several atheist Islam-bashing bloggers in Bangladesh, including Arefin Dipan, the ruling Awami League leaders, including Prime Minister Hasina, have been pointing fingers at the BNP, the main opposition party, and its chief, former Prime Minister Khaleda Zia. PM Hasina, yet in another vitriolic statement, has asserted that Khaleda Zia was behind the secret killings of bloggers and writers in Bangladesh. This sort of statements, on the one hand, adversely affect police investigation and a fair trial of the actual criminals, and on the other, further widens the political cleavage in over-polarized, fractured Bangladesh.
Last but not least, I believe Professor Abul Kasem Fazlul Huq, father of Dipan, has rightly assessed the evils of the prevalent politics of secularism and Islamism in the country. He told reporters: “I don't want any trial. I want good sense to prevail. Both sides – the one doing politics using secularism and the other doing politics of state religion – are pushing the country towards destruction.” It’s high time to stop the blame game, and demonizing political adversaries as anti-state terrorists and killers. Sooner the politicians, policy makers, and intellectuals pay heed to the advice, the better.
The writer teaches security studies at Austin Peay State University. Sage has recently published his latest book, Global Jihad and America: The Hundred-Year War Beyond Iraq and Afghanistan.