Bangladesh’s historic opportunity to build institutions that strengthen democracy and plurality
- New hope or new crisis for democracy in Bangladesh?
- The atmosphere after the fall of Sheikh Hasina government
- Language movement and national identity of Bangladesh
Is the political change in Bangladesh a victory for the people?
- Is Jamaat-e-Islami becoming a new force in Bangladesh politics?
- Impact on relations between Bangladesh and India
- Democracy and strengthening of institutions: Is Bangladesh on the right track?
Bangladesh
is currently going through a period of historic change. What was the state of democracy and pluralism after Sheikh Hasina's government? Is this the
victory of the people or a conspiracy of fundamentalist forces? In this analysis by Vidya Bhushan Rawat, know the current politics, history and future challenges of Bangladesh. 🇧🇩📜🔍
What is the state of democracy and pluralism
there after Sheikh Hasina's government?
By Vidya Bhushan Rawat
There was complete chaos outside the airport
when I landed in Dhaka. The main highway did not have enough policemen. The
friend who came to pick me up said that Dhaka’s traffic was being managed by
locals and student volunteers. The air was thick and extremely polluted very
similar to Delhi in the post-Diwali days. My friend took me to the place where
I was staying and in between I saw walls painted, with Sheikh Hasina’s
portraits torn and painted with black or with a cross mark over it. He showed me the ‘Gana Bhavan’, the official
residence of the Prime Minister, which looked absolutely terrible and
abandoned. A place that was the Centre of power in Dhaka has become its most
unwanted place.
The next day, I decided to take a window tour of Dhaka and my friend took me to the
Dhaka University Campus. I went to several departments but the crowd of
students was swelling every moment, perhaps for the new admissions in several
colleges. I wanted to see two historically important places in Dhaka. One was
the Shaheed Minar, established to honour the martyrs of the Bengali Language
Movement in 1952. Seven protesters were martyred and over 300 were injured in these
movements which actually resulted in widespread anger against the domination
of West Pakistan and Urdu language. This space was one of the most revered
places of Bangladesh but today it looks completely abandoned, unwanted and
ignored. Sadly, there was no information or notice near the memorial and
layers of thick dust over the structure. It was a sad part though many
youngsters were still coming and taking photographs there. The only visible change was an attempt to ‘rewrite’ Bangla history. Something was written
in Arabic on the monument which reflected the times we were in at the moment. A
monument that emerged purely on the Bangla language movement today feels
betrayed at being ignored. A friend later explained to me that this is the
supreme irony that the movement that started against the hegemony of the Urdu
language today is witnessing the reversal. For the common discourse in
Bangladesh, it was the Bangla language and most of the people were unfamiliar
to Urdu or Arabic terms but today these terms are increasingly being used by a
set of people to get more ‘connected’ to their Islamic identity, and Jamat I
Islami kind of organisations are actively engaged in the ground and
radicalizing the people and bringing the Arabic terms in the common parlance. In fact, when I asked my friend to talk to the uto
driver about how his reaction was to the Sheikh Hasina government, he responded,
‘Where was the need to promote ‘Joy Bangla’ and not encourage Islam. She did
not encourage people to go to the mosque though he was upset with Jamat--E-Islami
for supporting Mohammad Yunus.
In
the Dhaka University Campus, there is another historic building related to the Bangla Language Movement. This building is known as Curzon Hall, where the then
Governor General of Pakistan, Mohammad Ali Jinnah addressed the gathering on
March 19th, 1948. Addressing the gathering of students and
intellectuals, Jinnah said,
‘There can, however, be one lingua franca, that is, the
language for inter-communication between the various provinces of the state,
and that language should be Urdu and cannot be any other. The state language,
therefore, must obviously be Urdu. Make no mistake about it. There can be only
one state language, if the component parts of this state are to march forward
in unison and that language, in my opinion, can only be Urdu. At this point,
loud protests of "No, no!" were heard in the hall. Jinnah, unaccustomed
to people defying him, stayed silent for a few moments before resuming his
speech. Pakistan's leader clearly spotted conspiracies to undo Pakistan. He
went on to warn the students: beware of
the fifth columnists among yourselves . . . guard against and weed out selfish
people who only wish to exploit you so that they may swim . . . consolidate the
Muslim League party which will serve and build up a really and truly great and
glorious Pakistan. It was not Mohammad Ali Jinnah's finest hour’[i].
Actually, East Pakistan was far bigger in comparison to West Pakistan in terms of size and population but West Pakistan was politically powerful though numerically a minority and the democratic process actually made Awami League a hugely successful party to lead Pakistan. The elite Punjabi leadership of the military was not ready to share an inch with the politically powerful leadership from Eastern Pakistan. The reason for the military takeover in Pakistan since the beginning was the internal tug of war between the two ethnic nationalities of Muslims, Bangla Bangla-speaking majority versus the Punjabi Urdu-speaking minority.
The powerful military leadership of Western
Pakistan never allowed the democratically elected representatives of East
Pakistan and Awami League to lead the entire Pakistan since they were the biggest
party in emerged after the general elections held on December 7th,
1970. These were the first general elections since the independence of Pakistan
carried out for a total of 300 constituencies. Awami League won a total of 160
seats while Pakistan People’s Party won merely 80 seats. The leadership in
Pakistan refused to accept the verdict and allowed the Awami League to form the
government. This resulted in mass unrest in Eastern Pakistan resulting
in the massive military intervention by Pakistan and finally rise of Bangladesh
as an independent nation on March 26th, 1971. Today’s generation
must understand the realities of those times and not look at the entire issue with
a conspiracy theory. Jinnah’s inability to accept the two-language formula or
imposition of the Urdu language on an unwanted Bengali people was a grave mistake
but the bigger issue which that Pakistan’s elite leadership was never ready to work together as an equal partner with the East Bengal. So, from 1947 till
1971, East Pakistan or Bangla people faced the tyranny of the Pakistani elite and
its imposition of law without allowing the democratic procedure and accepting the
people’s mandate.
Unfortunately, that historic building where Jinnah spoke
does mention anything and is converted into the Department of Physics under the
Dhaka University. The campus has the remnants of the past glory but
unfortunately, there was not much visible to preserve it as a historic monument.
The college was closed and there was no way to even peep into the auditorium
where Jinnah spoke.
Anyway, it is important to understand the historic
Language Movement in East Pakistan at that time, which ultimately paved the way
for a bigger national movement against the occupation and oppression of the
Bengali people there. One just needs to look at the events that led to huge
protests and rebellions in East Pakistan, to understand how majoritarianism
crept into Pakistan’s elite class. Pakistan came into being with a
religious identity that has a strong connection with the Urdu language too though
in today’s Pakistan, it is languishing in comparison to the politically powerful
Punjabi language. On December 6th, 1947, in the first meeting of the
Pakistan Constituent Assembly, the new members needed to take oath in either Urdu or in English language. This was opposed by the members
from East Bengal and Dhirendranath Dutta spoke that Bengali too should be
included in the list as it was the largest speaking group in Pakistan. After
the death of Liaqat Ali Khan, the new prime minister Khawaja Nizamuiddin too
opposed the demand for another state language. Jinnah too had passed away in
1948 but the language movement was growing. On January 27th, 1952,
the then Prime Minister Khwaja Nizamuddin visited Dhaka amidst a huge protest.
The protest reached its ultimate in February 1952 when the government tried to
suppress it by all means and imposed Section 144 everywhere but the common
people protested and came out. Many people were killed and many more injured in
the police firing and hence this memorial is a true tribute to Bangladesh
Nationalist Movement.
Bangladesh's history and culture is a great healer and truly
liberal in a real sense. Unlike Pakistan, where the state felt proud of shedding
its ancient heritage and adopting new names and identities for many things
that had nothing in common with the local people, Bangladesh feels proud of
its ancient heritage. The names of the places and towns remained mostly unchanged
in Bangladesh so far. In fact, Bangladesh has consistently felt proud of the
‘Bangla’ identity, particularly their language but it is under threat now.
Most of the global south ‘democracies’ are actually the legitimacy of the
dictatorial regimes under the garb of democracy. Identity, divisions,
corruption, and compromised institutions, all work together to bring dictators to
power in the name of ‘democracy’. The leaders remained in power for long
resulting in a common hatred for not only the immediate beneficiaries but also
their ancestors who used to be worshipped once. Many times, other forces who are
isolated in national politics for their narrow agenda, too, jumped onto the
bandwagon of popular resentment against a regime that is considered as
oppressive and autocratic. The legitimacy of religious rights through popular
protest movements can become dangerous and therefore the mainstream political
parties who feel proud of the plural or multicultural heritage of their
country must remain vigilant and guarded. India saw that during ethe emergency when
Jayaprakash Naraian’s movement against the oppressive and dictatorial rule of
Indira Gandhi resulted in mainstreamification of the RSS and Jan Sangh. Before
that they rarely got an opportunity in the mainstream political forces in India
but Anna Hazare’s movement in Delhi against ‘corruption’ in 2011 came on a ‘nonpolitical’
platform which damaged the ruling Congress party more than anything could have
done. Actually, non-political or so-called Civil Society Revolutions started
taking places in various countries including Egypt, Algeria and elsewhere. Most
of these ‘revolutions’ were celebrated heavily on the ‘Western liberal media’
which always presented the ‘other’ countries as if they are brutal and
barbaric. Anna’s ‘revolution’ was nothing but a counter-revolution against the
growing demand of the share in power by the marginalized. Anna completely
discredited Congress but the gain from the movement was not for any new party
or democratic structure but more feudal, communal and thoroughly capitalist
political forces in India led by the Hindutva elite. Coincidently, in
Bangladesh, a regime change happened not politically but nonpolitically but it
got legitimacy as the regime headed by Sheikh Hasina got thoroughly
discredited. All the global south democracies are actually imposed through a
‘Western legal system’ on a people who have not accepted ‘individual’ and
‘privacy’ as ‘private matters’ and where ‘majoritarianism’ means no space for
dissent and diversity. All these ‘democracies’ today are suffering because the
‘minorities’ have been ‘turned’ as the biggest obstacle for their ‘progress’. All
our democracies suffer because we have no space for ‘multiculturalism’. The
idea of a multicultural democracy is being deliberately failed to bring majoritarianism, right-wing capitalist leaders. In India, the BJP reflected that idea of
capitalism which comes through hardcore nationalism and in Bangladesh, a new
nationalism is being defined by the Jamat e Islami kind of forces which are
active on the ground though on the ‘floor’ it looks how the fight was against
the ‘corrupt’ Hasina government but the fact is Jamat might have merely a
limited percentage of vote but the idea of Jamat is beginning to dictate the
politics in Bangladesh. This new right-wing ‘nationalism’ is actually
challenging the old multicultural nationalism through various means. The first
casualty is the denigration of the nationalist icons and heroes of the ‘freedom
movement’ or ‘liberation movement’. We have seen in India, the continuous
assault on our structure and leaders such as Jawahar Lal Nehru. Bangladesh's
right wing targets Sheikh Mujeebur Rehman, hero of the Bangla Liberation
Movement. Interestingly, Sheikh Mujeeb’s status as the father of the nation in
Bangladesh was challenged when Begum Khalida Zia was in power who felt it was
General Ziaurrehman, who was the real father of the Bangla nation but after
Sheikh Hasina came to power, she targeted Jamat e Islami and all other forces,
not politically but authoritarian means. Right-wing nationalism always thrives
on the gaps and mistakes of the liberal democratic forces. Look at the United
States. An autocratic leader like Donald Trump actually came to power under the
pretext of bringing world peace and with the promises of ‘make America Great
again’. Mohammad Yunus was brought in Bangladesh with the sole purpose of
giving it the legitimacy of acceptance by the ‘Western World’ and allowing enough
resources. Liberals in Bangladesh might suggest that the ‘revolution’ was
‘spontaneous’ and ‘secular’ but the fact are clear. If the Americans had not
approved, it would not have happened. Any Islamic revolution would not find
support in the Western world. Bangladesh’s economy is export-oriented and in
the last 20 years, the country has liberalized a lot. A huge number of NGOs are
there. Micro Credit is the buzzword even when research papers in past have
suggested how brutal, exploitative and extortionary is the entire system
unleashed by Mohammad Yunus but the romantics in the Western World feel that it
has ‘removed’ poverty and Bangladesh has become a powerful economy. Tragically,
a majority of people drink bottled water and use tissue paper in restaurants and hotels even when the air quality and food quality remain
compromised a lot. The water transport system is far superior but road
transport, railways and air services have miles to go before they could be said
as comfortable and people friendly. There is no doubt that there was a popular
resentment against Sheikh Hasina but it is also a fact that Americans and the Western world have always manipulated public opinion and narrative to suit the
illegitimate acts of ‘people’ wherever and whenever it is difficult to defeat a
leader politically. The American administration under Donald Trump is claiming
that the regime change in Bangladesh was done at the behest of USAID and other
foundations by Clinton and Obama.
A couple of days back we saw a crowd of unruly mobs burn
the historical building where Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibburrahman used to live.
The museum was already put to ashes during the so-called revolution. There were
no efforts to stop the criminals from doing so. In fact, the government has
already, through various notifications and Gazetteers, given amnesty to those
involved in violent acts during the anti-Sheikh Hasina government movements. During
my trip to Bangladesh, I travelled to various places and saw beautiful artwork, and paintings of students on the walls, and streets. They put their heart into it
and the vision seen in that was that of a cohesive Bangladesh which respects
freedom and allows each citizen to flourish. At the same point in time, I saw portraits
of the blackened faces of Sheikh Mujeebur Rehman at various places. It may be
true that Sheikh Hasina was authoritarian but does that give people the right to
demolish the memory of a freedom movement. How great is it to denigrate the
leader of the Liberation Movement? Does it solve the purpose or does it reflect
that Bangladesh’s is passing through the same counter revolution which believe
in deleting ‘history’ or consider that part of history which involved all
communities and people as against the Islamic Forces. So essentially, nothing wrong in
protesting against an authoritarian government but when you denigrate the
leaders of your own freedom movement then it make it look as if a counter
revolution is happening which hate the philosophy of that movement which was
the hallmark of the Bangla identity and truly revolutionary against an
authoritarian Pakistani regime which refused to accept people’s mandate and
wanted to impose one nation one language one idea philosophy on the people of
East Pakistan. It was resisted and people ultimately defeated the brutal and
repressive Pakistani government. An ideal thing in the movement, could have
been, to ‘liberate’ Sheikh Mujeeb from Sheikh Haseena and embrace his inclusive
idealism that shaped Bangladesh’s national identity.
It is supreme irony that in almost all the global south
countries, most of the heroes of anti-colonial movements turned dictator once
they became leaders of their own countries. It is also a fact that most of
these ‘dictators’ were patronized by the western world and could face their
wrath only when their interest clashed. Now, direct military interventions were
proving to be a bad ‘advertisement’ for the western ‘democratic models’, hence
‘spontaneous’ protests and mobilisations through ‘social media’ narratives led
to ‘people’s ‘revolution’. Unfortunately, all this is happening due to fragile
institutional mechanism that protect our democracies. All these institutions
have become subservient to ‘messianic’ leaders of our nations and have
polarized even the bureaucrats on ethnic, communities’ lines. So, a revolution or deemed revolution is
again bound to fail if those in power try to remain there and find pretext to
stop the democratic decentralization or devolution of power.
Bangladesh has still not handled well the issue of the
Adivasis and Dalits. The Rohingyas have been settled in the Tribal regions
despite protest and disapproval by the indigenous communities. In the north of
the country the relationship between the majority Muslims and Hindus remain
tense in the aftermath of ‘revolution’. Every Hindu today is a suspect because
it is ‘assumed’ that all of them supported Awami League and Sheikh Hasina. A
majority of the commoners that I spoke during my journey felt sympathies with
Sheikh Hasina and they were not Hindus but Muslims. A Hindu young worker in the northern region of
Dinajpur said that the pressure has increased on them and local mafias calls to
community leaders and threaten them to leave their house. A number of the
Hindus have left their homes and migrated to India, he said. Only those who are
well connected politically are now safe. Ofcourse, it is also true that over
all the animosity or tensions are never reflected on the ground.
At Dinajpur, I was taken to a wedding by my friend Shah
Mohammad Jinnah. This marriage was in his relations and it was a reception. The
bride wore a beautiful Saree with her husband and a number of women in the
gathering were wearing Saree. Jinnah said that a large number of people are
Hindus particularly Marwaris. I asked, do they eat the food here. Jinnah told
me that they had decided that since this gathering will have a number people
from non-Muslim background hence they only serve chicken or goat Briyani. It
was nice to see people greeting bride and groom in the very similar faishon as
happen in our part of the world.
Well, this is reality even today in Bangladesh but people
will resist if attempt are made to change this kind of things which are our
common cultural heritage. Bangladesh has a glorious past. It has numerous
historical places, Buddhist ruins and Hindu temples also. There will be forces
who would be happy to put it under a theocratic idea which has been alien to
it. India needs to be careful about it. India should not be seen as siding with
political parties. Yes, anything that happens in our neighbor will always be
important for us but at the same point of time, we need to respect people’s
mandate. Hope Bangladesh will have a people’s government through free and fair
polls and will give opportunity to all to get involve in the nation building
process. Meanwhile, India and South Asia would do well to connect through
people to people dialogue at culture level. Our destiny is in living and
enjoying our shared cultural history. Let us not allow forces who want to
divide us and reap rich harvest through creating hatred against one another.
Let us learn from history. Don’t denigrate your icons of history. They may all
have issues and are the past. Learn from their mistakes and move ahead. A sectarian and narrow communal idea will
never take us forward and will be detrimental for our national good.
