Bangladesh is in a political mess today. Politics has become a personal business of two mainstream political parties. The root cause of this messy situation is the personal rivalry of leaders of two parties. The army aborted a dismal interregnum and released from jail the leaders of the country’s two rival political dynasties two years ago, but the politics of hate and attrition grind away in Bangladesh hitherto. The reason of this unabated hatred is the personal vendetta of the prime minister of Sheikh Hasina Wajid against her potent rival Khalida Zia. The situation deteriorated when Khalida Zia was evicted from her house in Dhaka. This bad move triggered a protest strike called by Mrs. Zia’s opposition the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP). Violence broke out between her supporters and those of Sheikh Hasina’s Awami League. The country’s third powerful political force, the army, has backed the High Court’s eviction order.
The eviction is part of the League’s mission to break the BNP’s back. It is obsessed with airbrushing from history the legacy of the political dynasty founded by Mrs. Zia’s late husband, General Ziaur Rahman, hero of Bangladesh’s war of independence in 1971. In democracies, the opposition is part of the political process. Such moves driven by personal hatred only strengthen hands of undemocratic forces.
Yet the BNP was in a shambles even before the recent onslaught. The party has just 30 seats in a 300-strong parliament, which it boycotts. It is split: Mrs. Zia can count only on the support of a minority of BNP leaders. Meanwhile, the leaders of the BNP’s main ally, Jamaat-e-Islami, Bangladesh’s largest Islamic party, have all been jailed. The alliance has hurt the BNP’s reputation, particularly internationally, says Moudud Ahmed, a former prime minister and Mrs. Zia’s lawyer. Yet the BNP needs Jamaat-e-Islami’s electoral support. This alliance can unleash a wave Islamizing the society and politics as religious parties are often in the habit of unmasking their real agenda once they get opportunity.
Sheikh Hasina has the support of the Indian government. The end to Mrs. Zia’s political dynasty has become almost a tenet of national security for India, which sees her family meddling in India’s domestic affairs. Mrs. Rahman’s right-hand man told investigators that the Pakistan embassy in Dhaka and the United Liberation Front of Asom, a militant group fighting for an independent homeland for ethnic Assamese in India’s north-east, paid the BNP and Bangladeshi spooks some $10m for the secret transshipment to Indian insurgents of ten truckloads of arms.
Western governments also oppose Mrs. Rahman’s return. They supported the thinly veiled army coup in January 2007, which prevented the BNP from stealing an election. Continuing the crackdown is a centre-piece of the Awami League policy.
Despite the government’s plunging reputation, popular support for Sheikh Hasina’s clan dwarfs that for Mrs. Zia’s. It is really amazing to see how the League remains stuck in divisive politics based on personal grievances that go back nearly four decades. The current democratic setup should not settle scores with political rivals. The battle can be fought on democratic forums. It is the duty of leaders to transform these conflicts from feudal contestations to civic contests. The ‘battling Begums’ must realize the fact that in democracy, the government and the opposition are complementary adversaries. Both are inevitable for each other. 
Hammad Raza is an independent political analyst and is currently working on a book on the history of revolutions. He holds a Masters degree in International Relations from Quaid-e-Azam University, Islamabad.
|
Show/hide comments
Show/hide comment form
