Former Prime Minister Khaleda Zia’s eleventh-hour u-turn from the launching of national anti-poverty drive has once again renewed the recurrent concern – where is the opposition in Bangladesh politics?
At first instance, it may seem normal since such refusal is nothing new in Bangladesh. The incumbent leaders also boycotted many such calls for negotiation and cooperation when they were in opposition. But the real concern is elsewhere.
The less important issue here is the “way” BNP backtracked from the promised involvement. Khaleda Zia blamed the “events over the past few days” for this which includes deteriorating law and order, high prices of commodities and politicization of administration. There is no denying of her accusations. But the perplexing thing is that the situation was the same when her Chief Whip Zainul Abdin Farroque confirmed her presence even two days earlier (on 16 Oct). Have the alleged politicization or the worsening of law and order just started “over the past few days”?
She also argued that “the process for creating national consensus on various issues can begin only after the government creates a congenial environment”. Seems like a chicken-egg dilemma. Does consensus create ‘congenial environment’, or congenial environment creates consensus? Remember, AL used to argue the same?
Maybe something really happened “over the past few days” that has changed her decision. Or, maybe it’s the triumph of the erroneous believe that (except during military programs) stage-sharing is harmful for opposition. But couldn’t the Former Prime Minister fry the fish (AL) with its oil (the stage)? Couldn’t she use the stage to openly criticize the current Prime Minister for failing to address the poverty issue correctly? Wouldn’t that be a better show than the unexplained u-turn?
But the more important concern here is the absence of an active opposition which is essential for checks and balance in democracy. BNP is neither in the parliament nor outside which is giving AL a ride without checks. AL has passed and bypassed a series of issues without facing a strong opposition. So far the noticeable oppositions to AL are coming from within AL – either from the Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina herself or from other AL leaders. Or, at best, from other political/non-political groups.
Yes, we understand that BNP need some time, first to get revived after the two-years’ of political ordeal; and second, to rebuild its morale after the landslide election loss. We also understand the difficulty it is facing in balancing its anti and pro-reform leaders, and in keeping a strong voice in the parliament with so few members.
But absence of a strong BNP at this point in time is very dangerous for several reasons—
First, vital and controversial decisions are usually taken during the first years of a government. So a rejuvenated BNP after few years will not compensate the loss Bangladesh is experiencing for not having a strong opposition now.
Second, if the past regime of BNP is any indication, incumbency not necessarily makes a strong political party. If BNP fails to emerge stronger now being in the opposition, it will be in jeopardy next time it comes to power (that is, when people will put it back in power not for its strength, but for AL’s weakness).
Third, the absence of a strong “right of center” (essentially anti-AL) opposition may bring the “extreme-right” into limelight. If the extremists steal the show from BNP (being embedded in BNP or replacing BNP) and emerge as the alternative opposition, it will be a real trouble for our development. It may sound unlikely now, but AL has witnessed dramatic change in its opposition over the last decades which ranged from far-right to far-left. Bangladesh cannot endure a return of non-moderate opposition force now.
Under these circumstances, any political discourse should address—
- (If BNP is perceived as the only opposition) how a right-of-center, moderate BNP can be rejuvenated and kept protected from extreme-right?
- (If one is bored with repetition of the same parties) how an alternative political force can be created without falling into the same post 1/11-saga?
- (In the absence of any of the above in the short-run) how the current regime of AL can be brought under constructive criticism and meaningful political checks?
Cross-posted at Chorjapod
Over the past 48 hours, all the talk shows in the country’s dozen or so channels have been replaying over and over Mrs Zia’s boycott. Imagine if she attended, and talked about the government’s manifold failure. Her speech would have what talking heads would have been replaying.
BNP leadership (Mrs Zia and whoever she is listening to) seems to not grasp the importance of the media in politics. People do follow these talk shows and news. All they are getting is how thoroughly incompetent and bankrupt BNP is. Sad but true, there is no opposition in today’s Bangladesh.
[Reply]
Syeed Reply:
October 18th, 2009 at 5:21 pm
She couldn’t even put a convincing reason to boycott the program. I mean price hike over the “past few days”?!?!
It was not like Sheikh Hasina participating in Khaleda Zia’s daal-vaat program. It was just attending the opening ceremony. Even if she had limitations about the program, she could use the stage to criticise AL’s incompetence in implementing the very program. I mean, how often you get the chance to nail down your rival in her/his own show?
Unfortunate!
[Reply]
To me it sounded like ” Rag kore vaat na khaoa…” . On Thursday, ( 2 days before the event) there was a hearing on Orphanage case and it was anticipated that law would take its own course and like 99.99% other cases, with its merit, this case would also get stayed at high court. Rather, the AG aggressively pursued the case and even at points he was very fiesty with the court and launched an appeal against any stay of this case.
Khaleda Zia took it personally as an attempt to destroy herself and her son politically and anger prevailed, she made the U turn.
So the BNP folks in talk shows did not have any politically correct explanation about the boycott.
If BNP boycott the meeting, they should have tried to gain political mileage from this. A group of people decided the boycott and another group of people attended our TV talk shows. So they felt like stupids, complete unprepared how to respond to the allegations as they were not involved in the decision making process.
[Reply]
Syeed Reply:
October 18th, 2009 at 7:54 pm
Rumi bhai, you are too kind. To me, its like “Nije rag kore public-ke vaat theke bonchoto kora”!
Avoiding all the national problems, BNP’s previous campaign against Khaleda Zia’s accommodation drama was embarrassing enough. I mean, yes that was a necessary issue, but “politically correct” approach would have been sugar-coating the accommodation issue with the national issues.
And now this? Even if the talk-show participants knew the actual reason, could they really go on and explain to public that the former Prime Minister did not take part in the anti-poverty campaign because she took one of court’s decisions personally?
I mean, this line of defence will raise further question as to why law’s own course was not demanded when state minister for Law Quamrul Islam noted “We have decided to withdraw the case considering that it was filed for political harassment against Traique”? With its merit, that case could also easily get stayed at high court!
All I can see is that AL getting a free-ride just because “Dear Former Prime Minister” is “Making It All About The Family”!
[Reply]
rumi Reply:
October 18th, 2009 at 8:05 pm
Yes that is what I said. It is like holding nation hostage for personal anger. This is no doubt a politically correct reason. I was in total agreement of your thoughts.
[ However now as you bring the issue, may I ask how Khaleda attending the meeting would have evaporated all poverty from our sky? The whole thing was a symbolic political event that, if succeeded, would have be a symbolic- emotional win win win for AL, BNP and the nation. Practically speaking, Hasina-Khaleda seating on the same dias has nothing to do with PRSP . PRSP is a huge 'kormojoggo', and that kormojoggo at ground level has nothing to do with what happens in Dhaka centric politics.]
[Reply]
Syeed Reply:
October 18th, 2009 at 8:18 pm
Rumi bhai,
My main concern regarding Khaleda Zia’s presence in not about poverty-reduction. As you said, it would have been a symbolic win win and BNP could gain from it.
One might disagree, but to me, a politically sustainable poverty reduction is not possible without a strong opposition to keep the government under constant check.
If the opposition doesn’t come out stronger, our national poverty will not be limited to economy only. Even a hard-core AL-supporter should pray for a better opposition now for the sake of a better-performing AL.
rumi Reply:
October 18th, 2009 at 8:17 pm
Law taking its own course was not allowed to happen in any case pertaining to Sheikh Hasina or all other thousands of cases of AL leaders. They were all withdrawn by the state. State is BNP’s ( and mine/ yours/ everybodies) as well, not only AL’s. Hence they may demand equal treatment from the state.
You say, “… And now this? Even if the talk-show participants knew the actual reason, could they really go on and explain to public that the former Prime Minister did not take part in the anti-poverty campaign because she took one of court’s decisions personally?…” What you are contesting me here?
I said the same thing. The reason was so silly that the talk show folks did not have a politically correct answer and hence they looked stupid.
Probably I either failed to explain myself or you did not read my response well and answered anticipating a stereotyped BNP talking point from me
.
[Reply]
Syeed Reply:
October 18th, 2009 at 8:25 pm
hahaha… no no.. .I was not contesting you. May be I was not clear, but I was actually “wondering to myself” whether they could answer even if they knew the actual reason
rumi Reply:
October 18th, 2009 at 8:48 pm
They all knew the actual reason and that’s why they could not reply and felt like stupid. It was such a reason that can not be justified as a politically correct reason.
[Reply]
Additionally, as Syeed says, it is indeed , ” Or, maybe it’s the triumph of the erroneous believe that (except during military programs) stage-sharing is harmful for opposition.”
That is politics of 80s and BNP ( as well as AL leadership ) fail to understand that this kind of Ershad era politics is no longer palatable to younger generation of Bangladesh.
[Reply]
I would also like to take this opportunity to critique the ruling party although I know it is not the main theme of this post. What Madam Khaleda Zia gave to the nation by boycotting the meet out of personal anger, PM Hasina has returned the favor to the nation in kind by the obscene anti-conciliatory remarks she made in the meeting.
If it was indeed not a political stage, if it was indeed a gathering focused on reducing poverty, what kind of poverty reduction nation gained when the highest executive slams the opposition leader calling her thief ec. ? Could not she use the 5-10 minutes she took speaking foul about Khaleda/ Tarique, in a conciliatory tone urging all, including the opposition to forget the hatred and look forward to a positive digital future?
Now after Hasina’s remarks how could I blame only Khaleda for blowing it up? Did not Hasina work equally hard to sound bitter to each other? Or she could could not keep personal anger out of national politics?
And another question, NOT to Syeed, but to all of us, if it was a nonpolitical event, and highest level policy meet up up of the nations top leaders and thinkers on poverty reduction, why Dr Muhammad Yunus was absent from the meeting? Why he was not invited? Who else has a better face value and track record on poverty reduction in Bangladesh as well as the world?
[Reply]
I disagree about Yunus’s “track record on poverty reduction in Bangladesh”. Grameen has helped many families out of poverty, they empowered women and made them a part of the working population – but actual impact on overall poverty levels? That’s debatable.
But eitherway, good write up!
[Reply]
rumi Reply:
October 18th, 2009 at 9:08 pm
I agree, Grameen’s poverty reduction role can be debated. But Yunus gaining the stature as a global leader in fight against poverty and a extremely well branded face of Bangladesh’s poverty reduction efforts is beyond any doubt.
[Reply]
kgazi Reply:
October 19th, 2009 at 12:17 am
Hasina always disagreed that corruption causes poverty, and always joked about Yunus’ povert reduction program.
For the first time this week Hasina started her OWN program to do the same – poverty reduction show & anti-graft bhashon!! What caused the SUDDEN Hasina U-turn, and wake-up call? Hasina is thinking Obama got Nobel last week, Yunus got Nobel last year, So why not me? Poverty reduction and anti-corruption are COOL !!
Thats why Yunus was not there!
[Reply]
It’s funny, BNP gets criticized if it trys to launch an andolon and it gets criticized if it doesn’t. BNP has not done a single thing to subvert the government in any way in the last nine months, unlike Hasina’s own announcement in ‘91 that she would try to overthrow the BNP government from “the first day.”
Sure, BNP could go to the parliament and try to speak. But I hope you all saw the language that Textile and Jute Minister Abdul Latif Siddiqi used in blasting his own party’s Speaker? Earlier, when Fazlul Azim MP asked for two extra police stations in his constituency, citing worsening law and order, Home Minister Sahara Khatun said “The party (BNP) he belonged to could have set the police stations there. The terrorists of his previous party have been involved in the criminal activities.” And this is the Home Minister over whom the PM has so much confidence that she retains her portfolio even after the BDR massacre, even after the army forced her to resign from being the coordinator of the investigation, even after she is blatantly violating ethical rules by sending lawyers from her own chamber to fight cases for Bashundhara.
Eventually, BNP will return to parliament. But in the meantime, it’s the main motivation for many people who are lambasting BNP’s role, especially in the Daily Star, is regret because BNP cannot be used to distract the public from the many errors of AL. It is AL’s leaders themselves, like Sohel Taj and Abdul Jalil, who are instead becoming victims of their own party. And AL leaders, like Aslam Sardar, are paying personally for their party’s actions.
[Reply]
Syeed Reply:
October 18th, 2009 at 10:30 pm
tacit,
You are right, it is funny. Because when it tried to launch an andolon, BNP did it for the personal reasons/benefits of its leader; but when it came to a constructive role of keeping the government under check (which is its main duty btw), it backtracked.
I agree that BNP shouldn’t be used to distract the public from the errors of AL. Instead, BNP should stand firm against all these errors, if not for AL, for itself and for the country.
There will be no excuse if AL commits misconducts and it will get its share of public reaction in the next election.
But, it is BNP and Bangladesh who will have to bear the consequences of having a weak opposition.
[Reply]
“Under these circumstances, any political discourse should address—
(If BNP is perceived as the only opposition) how a right-of-center, moderate BNP can be rejuvenated and kept protected from extreme-right?” -
By establishing rule of justice , not necessarily rule of law which may be unjust at times ( as Rumi writes “Law taking its own course was not allowed to happen in any case pertaining to Sheikh Hasina or all other thousands of cases of AL leaders. They were all withdrawn by the state.”) .
Political stand-offs and violence are probably promoting and accommodating extreme-right in our politics. What inspired AL to sign friendship accord with Khelaphot Majlish ? Secular AL too pledged not to enact any law which contradicts sharia ( and staeted by none other than leftist Motia )! None of the major parties are immune from extreme- right love virus !
Both needs to be injected with IV fluids called Democracy.
[Reply]
Actually BNP has neither launched an andolon nor tried to launch an andolon, over the government’s move to oust Khaleda Zia from her residence, or over anything else, even over Tipaimukh. One presumes that AL will keep their promise of giving two apartments to the widows of all the slain officers of the BDR massacre, even though the affected families would probably prefer a fair and impartial trial over any other material goods.
I think you misunderstand the nature of the governmental system in BD today. There is absolutely nothing BNP can do, by the way of the parliament, to keep the government in check. Can you tell me how many notices of BNP MPs are granted by the Speaker? What BNP can do is highlight the various policies and actions of the government that they disagree with, directly to the people of Bangladesh. They are trying to do this in print and electronic media. They are not very good at understanding the role of the media, so many of their efforts are misguided. But to misrepresent their stance or efforts as “weak” is unfair.
[Reply]
When BNP was in power Hasina made every effort to destroy their achievemnts, potential, prospects and scope for success with hartal oborod and non-participation. That created more damage to nation and governance, than a lame-duck opposition.
Role of opposotion is not to create a barrier to development, but to prevent abuse of power by ‘ruling’ party. So BOTH behaviour is damaging – Hasina type oborod or Khaleda type boycott.
However democracy does not belong to ‘ruling’ party and opposition alone, the PEOPLE are the major owners. When CTG was in power, there was a lot of vocal NOISE AND DISSENT, student-army andolon, as if CTG was the enemy of the nation.
The People have to take action when governance is messed-up. Why is there NO PEOPLE’S andolon NOW? when ‘ruling’ party makes life hell with killer food prices, hellish traffic, disastrous power supply, crime spikes, land grabbings and tender-theft, WHERE IS THE VOCAL DISSENT? Do we have to wait 5 years of this ruling-party torture and destruction – before we can have a change? Is Hasina such a holy goddess that she is beyond criticism??
Where are all the bloggers NOW?
[Reply]
kopasamsu Reply:
October 19th, 2009 at 5:26 am
i have the same question too, also those anti CTG where are they now?
i dont why I have this feeling that these so called anti CTG people were puppets of the Hasina Khaleda Alliance!
All the top end politicians are related to one another some how
SQ Chowdhary is Salman F Rahmans cousin, Salmans son is married to Morshed Khans Daughter, morshed is saifur rahmans shala
[Reply]
KGazi, newspapers are full of reports on food prices, traffic, power supply, crime etc. Watch any talk show on any given day, and you’ll hear these mentioned. Many of them, and other issues such as the plight of child domestic workers, victims of Cyclone Aila etc that are not usually highlighted in the mainstream media have been noted here in UV. As a regular here surely you’ve read them. So I don’t understand why you say there has been no vocal dissent?
And unlike during the emergency era, we don’t have to worry about the repercussions of our blog posts. If you think the dissent isn’t vocal enough, you can easily start your own blog and publicise it through facebook, twitter etc.
—
Tacit, with respect, I think you ‘misunderestimate’ BNP’s ability to use the parliament. If one BNP MP, any BNP MP, highlights ‘the various policies and actions of the government that they disagree with’ in the floor, within hours, that speech will be relayed by the dozen TV channels. This won’t stop the government from carrying out the action. But I don’t think Syeed or anyone else is arguing that. What will happen is that the government will do whatever it wants to do, and the vocal dissent and the alternative presented by BNP will reach ‘the people of Bangladesh’ in a way that is more efficient than other mechanisms available.
I agree that “They are not very good at understanding the role of the media, so many of their efforts are misguided.” In addition, they face a media environment that is less than friendly. I don’t agree that is unfair or misrepresenting to call them weak. That BNP is not very good (read clueless) about the media IS a major weakness. Highlighting that is not unfair. Not accepting it is delusional.
[Reply]
kgazi Reply:
October 19th, 2009 at 11:21 pm
jyoti – there may be some comments in blogs and media about current govt’s activities, but there is very little ‘complain’ and ‘dissent’ about the weak and ineffective leadership & governance we have today. Dissent is not reports and news – dissent is dissatisfaction, disagreement, disapproval, dissidence and andolon.
Right now I am NOT trying to create a revolution here, but obeserving that there is very little public show of dis-satisfaction or COMPLAIN from bloggers, students, public or even media, about this govt’s ineffectiveness.
[Reply]
jyoti Reply:
October 20th, 2009 at 7:32 am
I agree with you that there has been little public show of dissatisfaction. I can theorise about general public’s views — they are patient and will give the government its full 5 years, and if they are still dissatisfied, they will vote the government out. But that’s just my theory, and won’t argue that it is necessarily the truth.
I also share your observation that among the chattering classes — media, students, and yes, bloggers — there has not been much dissent, or as much dissent as one might have expected. Why do you think that is? This isn’t a rhetorical question to you. I would very much like hear what the readers have to say on the subject. Why do we not see more vocal expression of dissatisfaction among the chattering classes?
[Reply]
Could it possibly be that Khaleda Zia got cold feet? After all the event was organised by the (AL) speaker of parliament and most of the invited guest were likely to be AL supporters. I am sure if KZ attended she would have been humiliated by this partisan crowd. I am afraid the polarised political atmosphere in the country will continue to be the biggest obstacle in the development of the nation and consequently poverty eradication will remain an impossible dream.
Incidentally I would like to ask my friend Jyoti the economist to see if he could work out some figures on how much money could be raised for Zakat fund if everyone eligible was made to pay it. The share market value could be a starting point. All private investors would be liable to pay 2.5% of the value and profits (except non-Muslims).
[Reply]
jyoti Reply:
October 19th, 2009 at 10:24 am
Kamal, I am not a theologist, and won’t pretend that I understand the Zakat injunction correctly. Happy to be educated on the details.
I understand zakat is supposed to be paid on the ’surplus wealth’ at 2.5% rate. How does one interprete surplus wealth? In the South Asian Muslim tradition, this is taken to be the precious metal (gold/silver) owned by the household. Does stock market capitalisation count as surplus wealth? I am not sure.
In 2008-09, DSE market capitalisation was 1,313 billion taka. If the entire amount is taken as surplus wealth, then 2.5% of that turns out to be about 33 billion taka. This may sound like a lot of money, but it’s not. In 2008-09, government of Bangladesh collected about 525 billion taka in tax revenue, which is a fairly small proportion of the country’s GDP valued at 6149 billion taka in current prices.
[Reply]
kamal Reply:
October 19th, 2009 at 10:52 am
Dear Jyoti,
Zakat is obligatory to be paid on all savings and gold/silver beyond a certain amount. I am not an expert on the jurisdiction but as I understand it, investment in stock/shares would certainly be counted as savings. However if anyone has borrowings then it would probably be taken into account. Zakat is also payable by big landowners on the crops they grow on it.
The funds raised from Zakat cannot be used for anything apart from the few specific areas, chiefly alleviating poverty. In the Bangladeshi context I believe it can also be used to help parents to get a girl married if money is the main obstacle. As far as I know it does not specify that only muslims should benefit from this fund because it only mentions needy without specifying religion of this needy. It certainly cannot be used for any state projects. The salaries of officials administering this fund could however be paid from this fund if needed.
From the figure you have mentioned, if even 50% of it is used directly for alleviating poverty what impact do you think that would have on the poorest in Bangladesh? How does that compare with the money spent by all the NGO’s directly for alleviating poverty?
Apart from the DSE figure how much more individual savings are there in Bangladesh? If you add to that the diaspora community I think the total fund would be considerable. If properly managed I am sure a fund like that collected and dispersed to the deserving would have a significant impact.
During the time of Hazrat Umar (RA) it is said that they could not find any poor person in Madina deserving help from this fund after a few years of such distribution. Of course present day Bangladesh is a different case. We don’t have an Umar (RA) as a ruler for a start!
[Reply]
Syeed Reply:
October 19th, 2009 at 1:12 pm
Kamal,
The thinkers are divided on whether to give Zakat to non-Muslims. This gives a good account of that debate.
You are right about the contribution of Hazrat Umar (RA) in better management and application of Zakat.
However, the era was not as uninterrupted as your note may indicate. During his ruling, citizens were exempted from paying Zakat for two years as they were hard hit by a series of financial loss, drought and famine during 638-639.
(Thankfully the provincial governors of Syria and Palestine provided timely aid to Umar before they themselves were hit by a massive plague.)
jyoti Reply:
October 20th, 2009 at 7:48 am
****From the figure you have mentioned, if even 50% of it is used directly for alleviating poverty what impact do you think that would have on the poorest in Bangladesh? How does that compare with the money spent by all the NGO’s directly for alleviating poverty?
Every poisha helps. So if there is zakat money spent on the poorest of the poor, why not? How it compares with the money spent by the NGOs, I don’t know. But the two need not be mutually exclusive or competitive.
However, I don’t think either zakat or NGOs will generate sufficient fund to maintain a functioning advanced capitalist economy, which is the most effective way of alleviating poverty. Let put the numbers in context.
There is a volume of literature that shows that successful advanced capitalist economies typically have tax-GDP ratios of 20-35%. That is 20-30% of what is produced in an economy is taxed by the government, and then the money is spent on maintaining law and order, providing services, and investing in public goods. Tax-GDP ratio in Bangladesh is around 10-12% and is considered very low. In comparison, zakat is only 2.5% on just savings, not entire production.
With respect, Jyoti Bhai, I don’t think it’ll only be the BNP MP’s speech that will be broadcast. It will be the BNP MP’s speech, followed by speeches by AL deputy leader, whip, and whichever out-of-favor MP needs to curry favor with their leader at the moment, all blasting the BNP MP, wondering why he is strengthening the hand of “anti-liberation” forces, and how Sheikh Hasina is the only person who can take us to the shining city on the hill. And then the watcher will change the channel.
I don’t know if under the constraints of the Bangladeshi political system, BNP is a weak opposition party. Perhaps they are weak, to the extent that AL is a weak ruling party.
Obviously it is to BNP’s interest as much as AL’s that another regime similar to the former military-caretaker government never raise their heads again. BNP has fulfilled their part of the bargain: no hartal, no andolon, no jarau-purau. Yes, they are not Solons and Ciceros. But what you see as weakness, I perceive as being sensitive to the situation. Although, ultimately, the people of BD may well see it your way.
[Reply]
jyoti Reply:
October 20th, 2009 at 8:03 am
Tacit, as you say, the viewer will switch the channel after 10 AL MP parroting the ‘BNP MP is anti-liberation’ line. This very fact is what will make sure that the TV channel won’t overdose on AL line, and will provide a BNP line (if there was one).
You say there isn’t a Cicero, in the current BNP line up. How do we know that? Our political culture hasn’t been one to promote a Cicero-like figure who could dominate airwave. Our culture has been one of Clodius-like populists who could organise street agitations. BNP is not pursuing the hartal/andolon culture of a Clodius. There must have been temptation to call a long march to Sylhet, with jalamoyee boktita and accompanying bhangchur/jalalo-purau on the Tipaimukh issue. That would have been a good short-cut way to revitalise the party base/grassroot. I don’t consider it a weakness at all that BNP hasn’t done it. I think it’s a sign of maturity — what the people of Bangladesh feels I am not qualified to predict.
But my point is, if you shun Clodius and at the same time fail to promote (or even appreciate) Cicero, then it starts to look really bad. Then it starts to look like weakness. But again, the weakness isn’t that there is no andolon. Weakness is the cluelessness about politics in an era of 24 hour news cycle.
[Reply]
tacit said “Obviously it is to BNP’s interest as much as AL’s that another regime similar to the former military-caretaker government never raise their heads again.”
—-
To keep the next military-CTG away, it should be AL’s interest to fulfill their election-promise, Mujibs promise, and peoples promise. AL needs to find new and radical methods of governance that will revolutionize the current antique SYSTEM. Just following the old Ayub Khan system of governance will NOT take AL anywhere. Find the ‘digital din bodol’ system of nation-building and apply it.
To an extent it is better for the nation that AL & BNP do NOT join hands to create a consortium of corrupt politicians, but remain official rivals (not physical), so that they can CHECK each other’s corruption – checks & balance!
[Reply]
After all these comments, my realisation:
An informed discussion about BNP’s weakness is difficult.
Tacit’s argument that “perhaps [BNP is] weak, to the extent that AL is a weak ruling party” does not take into account the reform AL is going through. AL is weaker now as a ruling party because it is going through a transition (including removal of the once almighty old horses from the cart), and BNP is weaker because the removal of some of its old horses were not pre-planned (rather was a result of betrayal, CTG enforcement, and poor election performances).
If we take Khaleda Zia’s once famous comment that no one is neutral except kids and insane, then the main dilemma here is “who will ring the bell”?
If a AL-leaning person raises the question of BNP’s weakness, it can be seen as “motivated” and that the AL-leaning person is taking a pleasure discussing AL’s weakness (mayakanna?)! If the pleasure is there, the question is, how long should BNP let AL enjoy the pleasure by not fixing its weakness?
If a BNP-leaning person raises this question, it can be seen as awkward since admittance of weakness by a party has always been used against it by others. Mujib’s admittance of relief corruption re the “kombol” fuelled the anti-AL debate for decades.
But as Rumi bhai mentioned, the new generation seems to have a different opinion about this and sooner BNP realises, the better.
[Reply]
It’s true; it’s difficult to receive non-biased opinion about issues such as this. But my point in calling AL a weak ruling party was not to make aspersions about its present organizational state, but only to make the point that the same political realities that make reining in Chatro League and Jubo League so difficult make it a time-consuming process to revamp BNP’s organizational strength. Both are subject to the political dynamics of Bangladesh.
It’s interesting that the removal of RATS by Sheikh Hasina’s personal choice is seen as “reform.” Nor do I really know at what time the leaders you refer to as “old horses” were almighty. I had grown up seeing them falling over each other to carry out Shobhanetri’s biddings.
I get the feeling that some of the noise created about BNP’s “weakness” is a panicky reaction to the fact that just nine months after a general election, even after BNP conducted itself as the “best opposition party in the world” (Syed Abul Moqsud’s words, not mine), public opinion has begun to turn, inexorably, against AL.
How else do you explain these comments:
Syed Badrul Ahsan: “Sheikh Hasina’s government is surely in an embattled state, but that is no reason to suppose that the BNP should now believe it can take charge again.” (http://www.thedailystar.net/newDesign/news-details.php?nid=110577)
Husain Imam: “It is also not surprising that a section of our media and the so-called civil society, who have been beneficiaries of a lootera economy that the BNP governments ran in the past, will join hands in this mischief.
It is, however, unfortunate when we see people like Dr. Zillur Rahman Siddiqui writing that he is unable to see any sign of change whatsoever, which the Awami League had promised in its election campaign.
It is strange that a columnist like Brig (retd) M.A. Hafiz sees prime Minister Sheikh Hasina’s recent warnings of danger from certain quarters to wreck democracy as a trick to keep a fear in the public psyche alive and to hide the fact that it took the people for a ride in the last election, a fact which is according to him vividly reflected in the unfulfilled promise of bringing about a change in the country’s lot.
It is all the more unfortunate when people like Professor Muzaffar Ahmed and Professor Anu Ahmed take to the streets and call for hartal to resist the move of the government to explore the country’s gas and coal fields.
What do they really want?” (http://www.thedailystar.net/newDesign/news-details.php?nid=110573)
Jyoti Bhai, the choice need not be between Clodius and Cicero. There are many non-partisan people in the media who can point out AL’s mistakes very competently. I think there is a much more important task that BNP needs to accomlpish. In 1991, BNP ushered in economic liberalization in this country. I think it is worth taking the time to think about how our country’s political framework can be taken to the next stage. Because I think it is clear that this current system of winner-take-all plunder by MPs and their henchmen is not sustainable for democracy in BD.
[Reply]
jyoti Reply:
October 21st, 2009 at 6:33 am
Tacit, wouldn’t it be nice to know if it is indeed a fact that ‘public opinion has begun to turn, inexorably, against AL’? My analysis is similar to yours, but let’s accept that this is our theorising, and neither of us (and most of the chattering classes) don’t exactly have very good record in predicting AL/BNP’s popularity. Why hasn’t Daily Star done another Nielsen poll? Instead of having to base arguments on what folks (possibly as out-of-touch as you and me) write in Daily Star, wouldn’t it be better to know what the people are actually thinking?
But in your last para you’ve hit it spot on: it is worth taking the time to think about how our country’s political framework can be taken to the next stage. Because I think it is clear that this current system of winner-take-all plunder by MPs and their henchmen is not sustainable for democracy in BD.
I made exactly the same argument in my very first post in UV, in what now seems a lifetime ago.
http://unheardvoice.net/blog/2007/04/17/peaceful-co-existence/
Back then most people equated reform with minus-2. And then reform became a dirty word like dalali. I think it’s time to restart that conversation.
[Reply]
It would, indeed, be nice to know. On re-reading my comment, I should make a clarification: I don’t actually predict to know if public opinion is turning against AL. I think the op-eds I mentioned are possibly pre-emptive strikes in case the public mood is changing – “don’t dream of going back to BNP, they were WORSE.” The upcoming by-election in Bhola may be a good barometer of this hypothesis.
[Reply]