Amanullah Kabir :
Absence of democracy radicalises society. Once radicalised, a society becomes democratically ungovernable. Military attempts, even joined by global powers, to impose a solution to such a violence-ridden situation created due to long absence of democracy, have seldom been successful as evident from the on-going armed conflicts stretching from South Asia to the Middle East. Territorial maps of these two regions were changed in the past several times and are undergoing another change – barbarism being instrumental to it. All these countries, Pakistan and Afghanistan of South Asia and Iraq, Lybia, Syria, Egypt, etc of the Middle-East have been relentlessly governed by either despots or dynastic rulers, who, dependent on the foreign powers for their own protection and security, have made their countries miserably vulnerable to external interference. Are we going to add vociferously the name of our country, the region’s (South Asia) only nation-state born through a liberation war, to the list of these rogue states struggling to survive the internal wounds?On the other hand, the huge country, our neighbouring India, with all its peculiarities like divergent races and religions, cultures, food habits and ethnicities, and political ideologies varying from communism to religious fundamentalism has wonderfully succeeded in carving out a democratic system from its very inception, which has become the sole cohesive force to hold the 1.25 billion people united like a rock. Of late, Pakistan and Afghanistan, after decades of bloody factional fightings, sending signals of their failing as a state, have started pulling themselves back from the brink. In Afghanistan, a unity government has been installed with the two major contending parties sharing power at the centre. In Pakistan, politicians so long ominously divided, have visibly come closer than ever before to keep the democratic process uninterrupted and free from military intervention. Even the tiny mountainous state, Nepal, torn apart by a decade-old civil strife, could make a remarkable breakthrough by achieving democracy sinking all discords and installing an elected government. But in Bangladesh, the political scenario for over two decades since 1991, if scanned carefully, will appear lamentably lacking guarantee for effectively functional democracy. With the emergence of the two-party system – Awami League and BNP being the major actors – the leaders of the two parties have always kept eyes devoutly focused on the state power. Whether in power or in opposition, they have shown little interest to cement the foundation of the nascent democracy, rather, to speak the truth, they have never allowed the vital constitutional bodies like Election Commission and Anti-corruption Commission develop as independent institutions. Even the judiciary is not free from their clutches as they frequently try to pull the strings from the backstage. The non-party caretaker government system, established through a law at the cost of human bloods, was finally doomed to death. All these took place for the single reason – to perpetuate in power. First BNP took such an attempt in 2006 but failed to execute their design in the face of Awami League’s vehement opposition, which ended up in illegal takeover by military-backed caretaker government of Fakhruddin. But in its attempt in 2015 Awami League proved ‘it can do what BNP could not’ and formed government for the consecutive second term in an election in which AL and its allies clinched 153 seats where the voters had to forgo their right to franchise.We had a dream when we fought the liberation war – a dream to establish and honour democratic, economic and socio-cultural rights meaning a society with all its potentials justly and freely allowed to be cultivated. Today’s young generation who are growing into a full-blown people tomorrow, now, to their wonder, witness a dreaded situation shattering the most cherished dream. Their hopes are getting burnt away in the flames of the improvised petrol bombs, never so profusely and indiscriminately used, never so many people, irrespective of women and children, were burnt alive and, never so many men and women, young and old, admitted to the burn units of hospitals, since the country’s independence. The people are terrorised and the normal life is paralysed as the unprecedented violent form of politics has flared up with its ugliest appearance. This is a new phenomenon in our 43-year-old political history, which is, of course, not free from dirts of chaos and confusion. In its approach to the golden jubilee, our democracy has never enjoyed a smooth and safe journey which is frequently punctuated by despotic rules leaving a long shadow on the country’s future. Probably, the emerging generation growing up in roller-coaster days is destined to embrace the future with scars on their fate. But our leaders, engaged in a bitter power game, have little time to work responsibly to give their successors a sense of direction so that they can confidently steer the nation along the roadmap written with the bloods of our martyrs. Judged by any standard, democracy, though lacklustre, returned after long 20 years following General Ershad’s autocratic regime overthrown in a mass agitation. A two-party system emerged through the 1991 parliament polls conducted under a non-party interim government which was eventually given the shape of non-party caretaker government through a law to run the general elections. Despite all disputes over its merits and demerits, the caretaker system was generally endorsed by the people who had the opportunity back to exercise their right to vote and install a government of their choice in power. The most illustrious aspect of the system was that the voters, so long deprived of their democratic choice, very carefully demonstrated their wisdom by not electing the same party for the second consecutive term in power. Thus an excellent example was set even at the primary stage of the democratic process. But the mind game was different, obviously contrary to the people’s wish. The Awami League-led 14-party alliance clinched over two-thirds majority in the 2008 elections held under the military-backed caretaker government of Fakhruddin which overstayed in power for two years in violation of the constitution. The so-called majoritarianism often challenges democracy itself. And it happened after the 2008 polls which were the last of the three elections overseen by a caretaker government. The caretaker system was ultimately scrapped and the constitution was amended restoring the provision for elections under the elected government. Awami League abolished what it had fought for along with the Jamaate Islami when its arch rival BNP was in power in 1995. It was the 15th amendment (restoring the provision for elections under the elected government) from where the present conflict situation originates. What aggravated the situation even further was the one-sided election under the AL government on January 5 last year what BNP boycotted and vowed to resist. The Awami League and its alliance partners tactically, not legitimately, clinched all the seats of parliament and, BNP and its ally Jamaat lost the battle.No doubt, after forming the government in the face of strong criticism at home and abroad Sheikh Hasina regained confidence and rediscovered her advantageous power position to fight back her sworn enemy Begun Khaleda Zia and her party allies. An uneasy calm returned to the country ravaged by violence during the election time as the boycotting BNP and Jamaat gave up agitation. In 1996, the then BNP government held similar controversial election which was boycotted by Awami League and its allies including Ershad’s Jatiya Party and Jamaat. Khaleda Zia could manage to form government, but had to accept Awami League’s demand for non-party caretaker government and quit only after three months. But Sheikh Hasina could overcome a more challenging situation and completed the first year of her government making no overtures to the opposition BNP. Instead, she concentrated on three strategic issues: first, to contain anti-government forces chiefly BNP along with Jamaat; second, build closer cooperation with foreign powers particularly India, China and Russia, and repair relations with the United States and the European Union countries which were opposed to the January 5 one-sided elections and third, economic development seeking foreign investments. Even her critics would admit that she arduously pursued the first two issues in the last one year. Just two days before end of one year since January 5 polls, which was spectacularly marked by a war of words, arrests and denial to the right to hold processions and rallies by BNP, the situation again started sliding into violence when the two battling rivals, Awami League and BNP, threw programmes to observe January 5 through public meetings in the capital as show of strength. The government enforced an unannounced blockade restricting movement of transports, including busses and trucks to the Dhaka city, with the hidden intention to obstruct people’s participation in the BNP rally. Simultaneously, police put up barricade with sands-laden trucks and vans in front of Khaleda Zia’s Gulshan office where she was still staying after the midnight meeting with the party leaders. Failing to hold a rally and black-flag demonstrations against the government which the BNP has termed illegal, a confined and irritated Khaleda Zia announced an indefinite blockade of roads, rails and water ways in protest against the government’s actions. Earlier in December, she had announced seven-point demand which was outright rejected by the government reiterating its firm determination not to talk any such issue before completion of its tenure. The root cause of the present crisis is political as nothing has occurred beyond any political decisions either by the ruling Awami League or by the BNP-led alliance. But the ruling alliance for tactical reasons brushes aside the popular suggestion that it is a political problem which requires a political solution and instead aggressively pushes its concept that it is a law and order situation which will have to be settled by applying force. The High Court’s recent directive to the government to adopt effective steps to bring the situation under control has no doubt provided the government with a sort of legal protection to deal with the situation with yet harsher measures. The bosses of the law enforcing agencies like police, RAB and BGB have already joined the chorus with the government ministers and advisers and the ruling alliance leaders, some times holding public gatherings in the name of exchange of views at different corners of the country. Like the politicians they are also getting engaged in campaign against the BNP-Jamaat unholy alliance and openly threatening to shoot them ‘in self-defence and to protect public life and property’. Already vulnerable and insecure because of blockaders’ violence, the people have been thus doubly panicked. Mostly innocent people who are sufferers of the unending countrywide blockade are now falling prey to the trigger-happy law enforcers who are responsible to protect their lives. The latest death figure is reckoned to be around 116 in last two months from January 6 to March 6, of which 63 were caused by petrolbombs and arsons, 36 killed in gunfight and mob-beating, and the remaining 17 were either ‘crushed under wheels’ or their bodies recovered with bullet injuries. It is easily understandable that the law enforces have joined the mad race with the blockaders involving themselves in the killing spree. State terrorism has been unleashed to counter opposition’s terrorism.However, it’s neither Awami League’s problem nor BNP’s. It’s now a national problem politically created by both the parties. In the power game the two major players have always pursued the notorious colonial policy ‘divide and rule’, very selfishly driving wedges into the national unity. If the present anarchic and horrific situation persists to haunt the divided nation for a long time, various destructive forces including religious extremists will have the space to become perilously active threatening the national integrity and pushing the country to the cliff edges. The conspicuous ‘minus-one formula’ long conceived by both the contending parties – meaning a political scenario minus Sheikh Hasina or Khaleda Zia -has become the pivotal issue in their realpolitick. But political analysts always hold a completely different view that in the prevailing two-party system Awami League and BNP have essentially complimentary roles in the democratic process though they are power contenders in the national politics. The political process is bound to run into snags if either of the parties is forced to stay away. The abysmal state of today’s politics bears this proof which we had the opportunity to see in the past. Just imagine a political scenario minus Khaleda Zia and her party. Who will fill the vacuum thus created? Are they not Jamaat and other Islamic extremists? Blind-folded by arrogance of power, the ruling elite cannot see the ground reality.The BNP leadership, ill-advised by the political novices, has made a series of tactical blunders. One of the glaring examples is that when Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina went to the Gulshan office to console the grief-stricken Khaleda Zia after the death of her son Arafat Rahman Koko, the door of the office was shut down on her face. What a shame! Disgraced, Sheikh Hasina had to return from the door-step of a former prime minister with a grim face. The indecorous treatment of the prime minister drew flak from people from all strata. That Sheikh Hasina went to visit Khaleda Zia was not a message at all? When the two ‘Batling Begums’ sit togather, half of the battle should be over. The brain-dead BNP policy-makers have failed on many occasions to seize opportunities which could put them on the offensive.However, the diplomats of the Western bloc in Dhaka have again rung the alarm bell. Recently 15 ambassadors of the western countries (including US) and the ambassadors of Japan and South Korea have sent a joint letter to Sheikh Hasina and Khaleda Zia expressing their concern about the outrageous situation of Bangladesh with a call for negotiations to resolve it politically. They also held talks with Khaleda Zia for long two hours at her Gulshan office where she has been staying amidst threat of arrest following an order by a court which is trying two graft cases against her.This is for the first time they moved together after their similar diplomatic maneuverings before the January 5 elections last year and, interestingly, also after replacement of US Ambassador Dan Mojena whom the ruling party leaders and ministers had publicly criticized as a BNP sympathizer and had never been granted an interview with the prime minister. It is believed to be their warm-up exercise prior to US Secretary of State John Kerry’s visit expected to take place at a convenient time. India’s powerful and charismatic Prime Minister Norendra Modi, known to be an ardent promoter of his country’s relations with the South Asian neighbours, may arrive in Dhaka in April. Observers attach great importance to the visits of the two heavyweights in the present political context of Bangladesh. Both India and America have bilateral and strategic interests in Bangladesh.Can their visit transform the present political scenario of Bangladesh? Optimists tend to believe that when the home-grown initiatives have little chance to negotiate a settlement, the visiting leaders are expected to build diplomatic pressure on Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina and BNP Chairperson Begum Khaleda Zia to disengage themselves from the confrontational politics on the streets and, instead, sit across the table to work out a political solution as terrorism, apart from other agenda, is the common issue the two giants are promise-bound to fight together.Is not foreign-made pill bitter than home-made one? Of course, we have got used to foreign prescription.
