Bangladesh in violent transition

Recently, on Sunday, October 22 to be precise, a deal which would have passed off as personal in another country, was reached between the B.N.P. government of outgoing Prime Minister, Begum Khaleda and President Iajudeen Ahmed. President Ahmed’s inauguration, Sunday, as the head of the new caretaker government was designed to end the political crisis that has gripped Bangladesh because the two main political parties, the Bangladesh National Party, B.N.P., and the opposition Awami League, had failed to agree on a candidate. Under the elections, and in 1996 and 2001, the caretaker system had worked so well, because it appeared to have ensured fairness and transparency in the polls.

Following the announcement that President Ahmed was assuming executive powers, the streets of the national capital, Dacca, filled with sereaming sirens, as motor-cades carrying generals and former ministers headed to his palace In a ceremony broadcast live on state television, Mr. Ahmed was sworn in as chief adviser to the caretaker government. But, the leaders of the former opposition Awani League didn’t waste much time in rejecting the president’s rise to power. Their complaint was nothing new. Iojudeen Ahmed was easily a stooge of Khaleda and the B.N.P., because he had been appointed by them. How were they going to respond to what they saw as the entrenchment of injustice? Since Friday, October 27, the Awani League had been leading the violent street protests in Dacca they would continue with them, to demonstrate their anger at the "conspiracy" between the president, whose constitutional duties are largely ceremonial, and the B.N.P.

Twenty-four hours before, the president had called the senior leaders of the mainstream parties to the palace to try to end the deadlock and the bloody clashes on the streets between their supporters. His intervention seemed to have done the magic, because both Khaleda and the Awani League leader, Sheikh Asina, had told Bangladeshis that they were prepared to work together to end the crisis. Sunday afternoon was the deadline both parties had set for themselves in the effort to find a compromise candidate. Apparently, neither side could bring forward a name that was acceptable to the other at the expiration of the deadline, following which President Ahmed undertook to fill the vacuum.

As a matter of fact, the constitution of Bangladesh is not silent per se on the caretaker administration on who should lead it, following the expiration of the tenure of the democratically-elected government. It stipulates a three-month period of transition within which electioneering, and particularly campaigning, can freely and fairly be conducted under a neutral administration.

According to the constitution, it’s the last chief-justice of the country to retire the leadership of the caretaker administration. For the opposition, that wasn’t the real crux of the matter. Their contension was over the man himself upon whose shoulders the duty fell: K.M. Hassan. They said Mr. Hassan couldn’t guarantee a free and fair polls because he’s a supporter of the B.N.P. Over twenty years ago, K.M. Hassan had served as a senior civil servant in a B.N.P. government, they said. In the last ten years of B.N.P. rule, Mr. Hassan’s profile in the judiciary had blossomed, and as if the Khaleda administration had pre-empted what was to happen, it extended the retirement age of judges from sixty-five to sixty-seven, in order that Mr. Hassan qualifies to take over the key job of head of the caretaker government.

The D-day happened to be Friday, October 27, when the tenure of Prime Minister Khaleda ended. In accordance with the constitution, the prime minister either had to hand over power to the last chief-justice to retire or remain at her post, but, in a caretaker capacity, in the event that there is no one to take the job. But, neither option was acceptable to the Awani League, whose supporters thronged the streets of Dacca, clashing with riot police and B.N.P. supporters. If K.M. Hassan attempted to assume the job, they threatened, they would make the country ungovernable.

In the end, Mr. Hassan turned down the offer-claiming that he was too ill to attend the swearing-in ceremonies.

The volatility of Bangladeshi politics, and the deep animosty between the country’s two best-known politicians, has led many to wonder whether in fact there isn’t more to it than meet the eye. After all, it’s on record that both Begum Khalida Zia of the B.N.P. and Sheikh Asina of the Awani League had worked as allies, back in 1990-91, in ousting military strong man, General Mohammed Ershad. Overe the last fifteen years, either woman has served as prime minister, with Sheikh Asina and the Awani League taking the first turn, following their victory in the first post-Ershad polls in 1991.

Nowadays, both heavyweights of Bangladeshi politics are virtually enemies. According to sources close to both mainstream politicians, neither woman has spoken to the other in years, and the deep personal animostities between the two has also become a source of fascination to many, and why so? Disputes and disagreements between their two parties have often resulted in one party or the other boycotting parliament, depending on who was in government or in the opposition. Also, quarrels and deadlocks were often settled on the streets, because the leadership of the two parties would not talk to each other on the round-table. Hundreds of Bangladeshis have lost their lives in such inter-party clashes over the last decade-and-a-half.

Indeed, the personal rivalry between Khalida Zia and Sheikh Asina is traceable to the dispute over which of Bangladesh’s two leading independence here qualified to be called the father of the Pakistan. In 1971. East Pakistan had formally declared its independence from Pakistan, but, the military regime in Islamabad, Pakistan, would have none of it. It sent tens of thousands of troops to the area to quell the revolt, but, neighbouring India, which had already fought two border wars with Pakistan over the disputed territory of Kashmir, intervened heavily on the side of the East Paksitanis. The involvement of the Indians proved decisive, because, same year, the Pakistanis were forced to surrender and the Republic of Bangladesh was declared.

Almost from the very date of independence, the people of Bangladesh have been debating on who among the two, Sheikh Moujid, the father of Sheikh Asina, or Mohammed Zia, the late husband of Begum Khaleda, is the real father of the nation. Both men had been towering personalities in their country’s bloody struggle for independence, and had taken turns to be the leader of the newly-independent state. As for Mohammed Zia, he had been murdered in the 1980s., while in the prime ministerial chair, and the circumstances of his death are still plaguing relations between his widow and the only other woman that has served as premier in Bangladesh.

Now, it’s approximately one week since President Ahmed took over the job of adviser to the caretaker government. Fortunately, Bangladesh has seen nothing close to the fierce clashes and near anarchy that had reigned on the streets of Dacca on Friday and Sunday. Observers say the lull in violence stems from last Sunday evening’s emergency meeting in Dacca, involving the president, Sheikh Asina and Khaleda must have done the trick.

It’s on record that Sheikh Asina, the Awani League leader, had emerged from the meeting to qualify her party’s earlier rejection of President Ahmed as head of caretaker government by saying that, while she neither accepted nor rejected his assuming the job, it was up to him, the president, to prove his neutrality before the people of Bangladesh.

Champion Newspapers