|
Indocentric view |
|
Home | About us | Contact Us | Subscribe | FAQs |
|
Whither Democracy in Bangladesh? Prof. Samir Kumar Das Today’s crisis in Bangladesh in that sense is much deeper. The street fights that are taking place and are taking their tolls everyday in Bangladesh are not merely clashes between two or more political parties or their rival factions: they speak of a deeper political malaise of people’s flagging confidence in the transparency, legitimacy and authenticity of the very processes and institutions in which these parties and factions operate and function in the first place. The problem is not that the people are faced with two or more mutually exclusive alternatives in an impending election and find it difficult to make up their minds. The problem lies precisely in the fact that they find it impossible to make their choice from out of the alternatives they are offered now. For, they see hardly any difference between them. Replacement of one by another political dispensation will not make any perceptible difference to the democratic politics of the country and deliver it from the evils that eat into its body politic.
New Political Phase in Bangladesh Pinaki Bhattacharya
In a recent commentary on the pages of a leading newspaper, a writer compared the different trajectories of political development witnessed in the Indian sub continent. He wrote, “After the creation of Pakistan, Mr Jinnah and Liaquat Ali could not progress on the path of Gandhi-Nehru. Ultimate result of that was the successive military and civil bureaucratic rule. Similarly, in Bangladesh after the independence, even with skyhigh popularity Sheikhsaheb could not deal with a political problem that emerged within two years of his rule and changed from the democratic path to a different way. That road was very difficult and full of problems; he did not find an opportunity to return from that path. After that, the return (to democratic politics) by tearing as under the 15-year-long viselike grip of army rule have repeatedly got lost in quicksand. Because for 15 years the primary leaders have run the country like monarchies. Democratic farsightedness and values have not worked here.” The commentator, like many others before and after him, point at a deep malaise in the politics of the country. They talk of how patience, tolerance, compromise, and efficiency are required to foster democracy. So they call for all democracy-craving political parties and leaders to eschew stubbornness, obstinacy and egoistical style. They wish that violent methods and means that are disruptive of public life and livelihood should be given up for all times to come. They believe that discussions on policy issues and political values should become the staple for inner precincts of the political parties thus making them civilised, culturally attuned and modern in terms of their leadership. In other words, by a process of exclusion, it can be argued that these attributes are currently absent in Bangladesh. So where did the breakdown appear for all these negative prognoses to emerge?
Role of the Army in Bangladesh Politics Prof. Partha S. Ghosh
Until the political picture unfolds in the coming months two speculations can be hazarded, both of which of course are tentative, one is a pure political arithmetic and the other is the changing texture of Bangladesh politics in which Islamist and militarist forces have created a niche for them which no political party worth its salt is in a position to out-rightly ignore. BNP is already in the game from its very inception tseeee h litarist forces have created a niche for them which no political party worth its salt is in a position tand now even the Awami League is playing footsie with these forces. The political arithmetic is like this—the Awami League which wants to take full electoral advantage of people’s disaffection with the BNP regime wants to make a dent in the latter’s base further by at least cosmetically wooing the Islamists and militarists so that an alliance with Ershad and Khilafat-e-Majlish can be formed. The changing texture of Bangladesh politics can look something like this—the army distances itself from the rabid India-baiters as well as from the fire-eating Islamists because both seem to be difficult propositions in the present globalized world in which Bangladesh has developed a stake through its huge NGO networks and export-oriented garment and other industries. A direct takeover by the army may as well jeopardize the flow of income from the UN Peace Keeping missions which is not insignificant. The present situation, therefore, seems to be suiting all except the Awami League which has a fair chance of winning the elections if it is free and fair, but when that will happen is not sure at the moment.
Military – the power behind Caretaker Government Dr. Sreeradha Datta
The neutral Caretaker Government which assumed office in January 2007 has been backed and propped up the military. Since multiparty elections were introduced in 1991, the military has receded from the political arena. Even though they were active in operations against law and order problems in the country, the military has remained professional and uninvolved in politics. Their increasing involvement in various UN-backed peace keeping operations also lessened their interest in domestic political developments. The crisis following the formation of Caretaker Government when Khaleda Zia completed her five-year term, offered a new opening for the military. The formation of the second Caretaker Government under renowned economist Fakhruddin Ahmad was accompanied by the imposition of internal emergency in Bangladesh. Along with the imposition of restrictions on political activities, the emergency was enforced with the military being deployed in the streets of Bangladesh. Without any definite plans for elections in sight, military appears to be the real force behind the Caretaker Government and its numerous initiatives in “cleaning up” the Bangladeshi polity.
Bangladesh in the Fry Pot Prasanta Sahoo
Bangladesh is now in the focus due to the forthcoming delayed general election that was supposed to be held in January 2007. The irresponsible and careless politicians for their personal enmity and lust for power has brought the country in to the fry pot without caring for its 150 million people. It seems another type of civil-military coup has taken place first time since 1991. This time it is totally different as one of the two main political parties i.e. Bangladesh Nationalist Party has supported this. In a dramatic mode the president took over all the powers as head of the Care-Taking Government and the Chief Advisor to the Care-Taking Government. The election that was fixed on 22nd January has been postponed with a state of emergency declared by the president and extended later on. In the absence of any political authority the country has come to a stage of lawlessness and anarchy. The most important development is the nexus of terrorists, militants and the fundamentalists who have started rampage in the country taking advantage of the situation and backed by the Military and the political parties. They are forcing people to support certain candidates and political parties. Political analysts are now predicting that radicals and fundamentalist forces might become a crucial force shaping power politics in Bangladesh.
Emerging Scenario in Bangladesh Mahendra Ved
People of Bangladesh remain torn between economic progress and insecurity, democracy and violence, between parliamentary democracy and street level agitations, between secularism and Islamism that tolerates exclusive Wahabism and even terrorism; between a vibrant Bengali socio-cultural ethos and an identity crisis that limits their reach with Bengalis next door. It is politics of two contending legacies. But both are diluted. Both women leaders appeal to the US, like in most third world nation. Both appeal to religion and Saudi Arabia, performing the Umra as often as they can. These visits of Saudi Arabia and to OIC meetings are a much publicized affair. Both appeal to Gulf, from where the Bangladesh wage earners, the NRBs, send a lot of funds. Both look to South East Asia, from where too money comes. And both are cautious in their dealing with big neighbour India. Hasina has a distinct image of being friendly to India because of the past ties. But her government was successful only marginally in doing things that would help India because she could not afford to be seen as ‘selling out’ to India. Zia on the other hand, has sustained a distance from India, the same legacy that her husband bequeathed her. She was strident during her first tenure (1991-96), taking Ganga water dispute to the UN General Assembly. In her second tenure (2001-06), however, she was subtle. Her ministers were quick to blame India for all the ills of the country.
India-Bangladesh Relations Anil Kamboj
Despite of the problems between the two countries, India and Bangladesh have an opportunity to work together in economic and trade areas and to harness the natural resources of both countries for their mutual benefit. Together the two must sort out the problem of the demarcation of maritime boundaries through mutual consultation so that their respective economic interest can be protected by judiciously sharing the products and resources of the area. They must come to an understanding on the geo-strategic, geopolitical, and security issues they face in order to maintain a positive and friendly relationship. |
