Secularism – Yes or No?

Two countries of South Asia, which during late 1970s and early 1980s had embarked on the process of Islamization were Pakistan and Bangladesh. In Pakistan, it was during the military rule of General Zia-ul-Haq where religion got not only state patronage but the process of Islamization aiming to transform the country as a ‘pure’ Islamic state was unleashed. In Bangladesh, the post-Mujib governments namely of Presidents Zia-ur-Rehman and Hossein M. Ershad tried to reverse the secular characteristics of the state of Bangladesh by declaring Islam as the state religion of the country.

Following the landslide victory of Awami League in December 2008 general elections, the verdict of people, apart from other things, was also attributed as their support for a secular Bangladesh. Sheikh Hasina and top ranking leaders of Awami realized that they cannot undermine the role of Islam in their country particularly when it was given legal and a constitutional shape in the post-Mujib era, but what they planned was to dilute the religious color of their country by embarking on a gradual policy of secularism. The first major victory for secularism in Bangladesh was seen when in early February 2010, the Supreme Court upheld a lower court decision declaring the Fifth Amendment, which dropped secularism as a guiding state principle, as null and void. Law Minister Shafique Ahmed commenting on the decision of Supreme Court stated that, “in the light of the verdict, the secular constitution of 1972 already stands to have revived. Now we don’t have any bar to return to the four state principles of democracy, nationalism, secularism and socialism as had been heralded in the 1972 statute of the state.” It was the opposition Jamaat-e-Islami, a former partner in the coalition government of Bangladesh Nationalism Party (BNP) led by Prime Minister Khaleda Zia (2001-206) which had appealed against the verdict of High Court in the Supreme Court but lost the legal battle.

As reported in a Bangladeshi paper, The News Today of October 18, 2010, the President of Bangladesh, Zillur Rahman while speaking to journalists at a reception for the members of Hindu community at Bangabhaban (President’s House), marking their largest religious festival, said that, “secularism doesn’t mean absence of religion. Bangladesh is a secular country where people from all religions and creeds can perform their respective rituals peacefully with due festive mood in a brotherly atmosphere.” While analyzing the debate in Bangladesh on secularism and religion, one needs to take note of the fact that Bangladesh has the concentration of forth largest Muslim community after Indonesia, Pakistan and India. But, the dilemma of Bangladesh or the people of that country is the issue of identity. Whether they are Bengalese or Bangladeshis? During Mujib’s era, the emphasis was on Bengali nationalism which meant secular identity of Bangladesh based on language and culture. Bengali nationalism emerged as a force during Pakistan time with Awami League led by Sheikh Mujibur Rehman calling for upholding the Bengali identity instead of just Islamic identity which happened to be the only common bond between West and East Pakistan. When Pakistan was dismembered and East Pakistan became an independent country under the name of Bangladesh in December 1971, the ruling party Awami League declared their country as secular and gave it a constitutional cover. It was only after the assassination of Mujib in August 1975 and the turmoil which followed the end of Awami League’s rule that Major General (Retd) Ziaur Rehman assumed the reins of government. Although, Ziaur Rehman fought during the liberation war of 1971 against Pakistan and had in fact declared the independence of Bangladesh on the radio on March 26, 1971, he differed with Mujib’s notion of “Bengali nationalism.” He came up with the slogan of ‘Bangladeshi nationalism” which meant that all those living in Bangladesh, regardless of their culture were Bangladeshis. In a subtle manner, he tried to accommodate the Muslim identity of Bangladesh. It was on account of his slogan of ‘Bangladeshi nationalism’ that he founded Bangladesh Nationalist Party which called for uniting all the people of Bangladesh regardless of their culture and religion.

During Ershad’s rule (1982-1990) he followed an Islamic path by giving priority to the Islamic identity of Bangladesh. It was during his tenure that the influence of Saudi brand of Islam deepened in Bangladesh perhaps because of the generous financial support provided by Riyadh and also the presence of hundreds of thousands of Bangladeshi workers, both skilled and unskilled, in Saudi Arabia and in other Gulf countries. The impact of pan-Islamism and the implications of the Afghan war during the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan also caused a major change in Bangladesh. Hundreds of Bangladeshis went to Afghanistan to fight against what they called Jihad against the ‘Soviet infidels.’ The post 9/11 situation further deepened the role of various Islamic groups in Bangladesh against what they called American conspiracies against Islam and Muslims.

Now the question is to what extent the verdict of Supreme Court which lifted a four-year stay on the ban on the “abuse of religion for political purposes’ will help the regime of Awami League to transform Bangladesh again as a secular state? Supreme Court of Bangladesh which declared null and void Fifth Amendment of the Bangladeshi constitution has in fact opened a Pandora’s Box. That amendment which not only legitimized the military orders during Ziaur Rehman’s rule but in fact the preamble of constitution included “Bismillah-ar-Rahman-ar-Rahim” thus giving an Islamic color to the country’s constitution. But to expect that Sheikh Hasina will undo with all the Islamic characteristic of Bangladeshi constitution is a wishful thinking because even some members of Awami League will not support the marginalization of the Islamic identity of Bangladesh.

Islamists in Bangladesh, along with their allies will try their level best to resist Awami League’s efforts to reverse the process of Islamization in Bangladesh. They will get the support of Khaleda Zia’s BNP because there are strong leanings of this political party as far as religion is concerned. Indian factor is also important because Awami League is termed as pro-Indian and its tilt towards New Delhi is bitterly criticized by its opponents, especially BNP and Jamaat. But one thing is certain: even if Awami League is unable to reverse the process of Islamization, it has certainly weakened those forces who want to transform Bangladesh as a secular country. Awami League is trying to divide the clergy into moderates and hard liners as it believes that by convincing moderate segment of clergy, it can push its agenda for a secular country. The real test of Awami League will come when it will try to amend the constitution so as to declare Bangladesh as a truly secular country. Although, it has two-third majority in the parliament which is required to amend the constitution and is also hopeful that the judiciary will not create obstacles in this regard, one can expect widespread popular agitation by those who have been the beneficiaries of the process of Islamization. Critics of Awami League term it as pro-Indian and pro-American and its attempt to reverse the process of Islamization will be resisted with full force not only by Jammat-i-Islami but also by the BNP. Perhaps, the large-scale electoral victory which Awami League secured in December 2008 general elections has made that party over confident and indifferent to the demands of opposition. Already, a new phase of political agitation and strikes has begun in Bangladesh with BNP calling repeated strikes against the policy of ruling party.

Bangladesh today has a choice to make: a religious or a secular state. Culturally, Bangladesh cannot be a religious state because of the presence of large non-Muslim minorities. Muslims of Bangladesh are tolerant and moderate in their approach and behavior. That is the reason why, militant and extremist religious elements have failed to get an adequate space in Bangladeshi society. But, it does not mean that Bangladesh can be transformed as an anti-religious state. Since there is no clash between secularism and Islam and Bangladesh has a moderate society, it is possible that sooner or later there will be a consensus among different stakeholders in terms of moving forward and ensure a secular order in which the rights of all Bangladeshis are protected and they are not discriminated on the basis of religion or their place of origin.

Moonis Ahmar is a Visiting DAAD Fellow at the Willy Brandt School of Public Policy, University of Erfurt, Germany. He is also Professor of International Relations at the University of Karachi and Director, Program on Peace Studies and Conflict Resolution.

Facebook | Twitter | Email

Comments (0)

Show/hide comments

Show/hide comment form