Strange bed fellows are not that strange (or rare) in politics. The willy players of the murky business of politics are a selfish lot and behind the garb of benevolence are rooted crook minds up in arms for every pound of flesh.
The recent developments in Bangladesh have raised doubts in people's minds as to whether there is any tacit understanding between the ruling Awami League and the Jamaat-e-Islami over war crimes trial. It is not unreasonable to raise such doubts, especially when a country which witnessed a bloody war of independence took such a long time to bring the perpetrators of heinous crimes to book. Observers of socio-political developments in Bangladesh often say that the country and its people are evenly divided on its war of independence. Not that they don't cherish their much desired and well fought out freedom with pride, but it's the means which qualify (justify) the end for many of them.
There is no denying the fact that Jamaat-e-Islami has a strong support base in Bangladesh, probably fanned by a multiplicity of factors like anti-western feelings, consolidation of religion-based identity, poverty, inadequacy of modern education and last but not the least, politicians using a largely simpleton population as political pawns. It becomes all the more complicated when a geographically small country like Bangladesh, with its even share of natural resources and largely unskilled but aspiring manpower, are used by big countries like the US, India and China for their own strategic purposes.
Awami League may publicly vouch to defend the secular credentials of the country given their strong pro-Liberation image but when it comes to the political and strategic drawing boards real politics is much different from what is evident on the surface. For the BNP the ideological compulsion not to ally (or seek alliance) with the Islamist party is much less compelling. But both the parties have tried, both directly and indirectly, to use Jamaat-e-Islami to sway the political balance in their favour.
At a time when a highly surcharged atmosphere prevails in a country whose citizens are strong on emotions, the challenge for the main opposition party, BNP, would be to keep itself relevant to the politics of the day and stay afloat as a significant force. The strong message coming from the protesters demanding capital punishment for the war criminals is probably polarising Bangladeshi politics more than ever before. It is turning Bangladesh into a battleground between the pro-Liberation Awami League and the apparently anti-independence (pro-Pakistan) Jamaat-e-Islami. This trend would consolidate support for both the parties leaving the BNP struggling to capture the middle ground (arguably right of centre) with their ideological standpoint of Bangladeshi nationalism.
One might wonder if this was the game plan of the Awami League when it actually constituted the International Crimes Tribunal to try the perpetrators of war crimes. One might also guess whether the hard line taken by the Jamaat-e-Islami, especially the mayhem created by physically attacking institutions of government like the police, against the trial of their leaders was a well calculated move not so much to resist the Awami League but to consolidate its support base in a divided nation.
All these undoubtedly left the BNP in a quandary, which was evident in its reaction to the public protests at Shahbag. The party was literally struggling to cope with the fast changing political configuration. Political polarisation, if at all is taking place in Bangladesh, will definitely consolidate the support bases of the Awami League and the Jamaat-e-Islami but it will also become a hindrance to the politics of pluralism, which is in short supply not only in Bangladesh but the whole of South Asia.
It has been over four decades since Bangladesh gained independence and probably it is time that the country and its people look to the future instead of delving in the past. No one denies the brutality faced by the people of East Pakistan in their struggle to carve out a much deserving nation of choice. No one denies that the perpetrators of war crimes and brutality should be tried, but that need not be the only chord of emotion for a country with such potential as Bangladesh.
As Amartya Sen has pointed out, Bangladesh is making phenomenal progress in many of the indicators of human development. It has also carved out a niche market (of ready-made garments and manpower) for itself in the global market. Bangladeshi workforce may be fledgling yet they are determined to fight impoverishment with hard work.
One can only hope that the current instability leads to the closure of one of the bloodiest chapters in the history of the world that has dragged Bangladesh more towards the past rather than paving its way to the future.
Tirthankar Bandyopadhyay is a journalist and a media consultant.
He can be contacted at tirthankarb@hotmail.com
All comments are personal.
Wednesday
Saturday
Expression of intent
It was not an easy thing for a country like Bangladesh to snub the World Bank and retract from its request to finance the construction of the Padma Bridge - the biggest infrastructure project in the country's history. Yet Sheikh Hasina's government held the bull by its horn and literally turned down the World Bank's "conditional offer".
Social psychologists often say that people who are a repository of absolute power, autocratic in nature and surrounded by sycophants, often behave in such ways which belie normal logic. Critics accuse the Bangladesh government and its Prime Minister of being illogical, yet Sheikh Hasina has demonstrated that she is leading a country which has expressed its intent to grow out from the shadows of being at the mercy of mainly western donors and international institutions like the World Bank and the IMF.
It is not easy to break out from an age-old practice, which has over the years become an absolute norm. The tradition of western leaders and institutions calling the shots in the "beneficial" garb of modernising less developed countries has probably been in place since the Bretton Woods days. So an equal and opposite reaction, according to Newton's Third Law of Motion, was imminent. The pulling out of the Asian Development Bank from the project may have been a instant reaction from the self-styled well wishers of the poor people around the world, and the custodians of western modernity, morality and governance skills must be planning a few more blows as they lick their wounds to come to term with the snub meted out to the World Bank.
In a country where the US Ambassador enjoys more powers than he/she would normally do, the diplomatic representatives from the European Union countries offer free advice to the government on what is good and bad, and where a large section of the politicians, policy-makers and other influential people indulge in appeasing foreign governments, rather than engaging in diplomacy on equal terms, the steps taken by the Bangladesh government is undoubtedly a welcome assertion of ones sovereign rights.
One can't rule out the danger of seemingly lack of transparency in the project, as highlighted by some critics and analysts, but that needs to be addressed on a different platter, rather than the World Bank and other international institutions portraying themselves as holier than though. On the contrary, in my career as a journalist for almost two decades, I have seen and felt how the western governments and NGOs often indulge in practising and promoting corrupt practices and wastage in the name of "creative accounting" to further their own interests.
A British charity which works on media and development once put the monthly salary of a project manager in Tanzania as £9,000 as part of "creative accounting", while a person carrying out a similar role in the UK draws only one-third of that amount.
Many western countries, charities, NGOs and financial institutions often are more interested in rewarding their pals and peers by sending them on foreign assignments, often without proper and necessary project expertises, in the developing world. The donors and the allied charities frequently design projects with such "creativity" that they become good sources of earning for foreigners (from the developed world) who are based in the places of project execution, but do not necessarily have the requisite skills.
As Bangladesh makes an emphatic and significant stride to come out from the shadows of a culture of arm-twisting by western donors and international institutions - which can be exemplary to any less development country, one also hopes that the government will underline the importance of transparency so as not to give the "moral custodians of the poor" another chance to pull the proverbial string.
Tirthankar Bandyopadhyay is a journalist and media consultant.
He can be contacted at tirthankarb@hotmail.com
All comments are personal.
Social psychologists often say that people who are a repository of absolute power, autocratic in nature and surrounded by sycophants, often behave in such ways which belie normal logic. Critics accuse the Bangladesh government and its Prime Minister of being illogical, yet Sheikh Hasina has demonstrated that she is leading a country which has expressed its intent to grow out from the shadows of being at the mercy of mainly western donors and international institutions like the World Bank and the IMF.
It is not easy to break out from an age-old practice, which has over the years become an absolute norm. The tradition of western leaders and institutions calling the shots in the "beneficial" garb of modernising less developed countries has probably been in place since the Bretton Woods days. So an equal and opposite reaction, according to Newton's Third Law of Motion, was imminent. The pulling out of the Asian Development Bank from the project may have been a instant reaction from the self-styled well wishers of the poor people around the world, and the custodians of western modernity, morality and governance skills must be planning a few more blows as they lick their wounds to come to term with the snub meted out to the World Bank.
In a country where the US Ambassador enjoys more powers than he/she would normally do, the diplomatic representatives from the European Union countries offer free advice to the government on what is good and bad, and where a large section of the politicians, policy-makers and other influential people indulge in appeasing foreign governments, rather than engaging in diplomacy on equal terms, the steps taken by the Bangladesh government is undoubtedly a welcome assertion of ones sovereign rights.
One can't rule out the danger of seemingly lack of transparency in the project, as highlighted by some critics and analysts, but that needs to be addressed on a different platter, rather than the World Bank and other international institutions portraying themselves as holier than though. On the contrary, in my career as a journalist for almost two decades, I have seen and felt how the western governments and NGOs often indulge in practising and promoting corrupt practices and wastage in the name of "creative accounting" to further their own interests.
A British charity which works on media and development once put the monthly salary of a project manager in Tanzania as £9,000 as part of "creative accounting", while a person carrying out a similar role in the UK draws only one-third of that amount.
Many western countries, charities, NGOs and financial institutions often are more interested in rewarding their pals and peers by sending them on foreign assignments, often without proper and necessary project expertises, in the developing world. The donors and the allied charities frequently design projects with such "creativity" that they become good sources of earning for foreigners (from the developed world) who are based in the places of project execution, but do not necessarily have the requisite skills.
As Bangladesh makes an emphatic and significant stride to come out from the shadows of a culture of arm-twisting by western donors and international institutions - which can be exemplary to any less development country, one also hopes that the government will underline the importance of transparency so as not to give the "moral custodians of the poor" another chance to pull the proverbial string.
Tirthankar Bandyopadhyay is a journalist and media consultant.
He can be contacted at tirthankarb@hotmail.com
All comments are personal.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)