In a Muslim-majority country with more people
than Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran, Lebanon, Israel and
the Palestinian territories combined, democracy
is dying a slow, tortured and obscure death.
Bangladesh, an impoverished South Asian nation
that rarely breaks out of the “world briefs”
sections of foreign newspapers, is going through
an election crisis that threatens to plunge its
population of 147 million into chaos, stunt its
desperately needed economic growth and create a
breach for Islamic extremists to step into.
After weeks of crippling nationwide protests
against his administration’s handling of the
upcoming election, President Iajuddin Ahmed
declared a state of emergency late Thursday and
stepped down from his role as head of a caretaker
government charged with overseeing a democratic
transition. The Bangladeshi Army moved in to
enforce the open-ended emergency, which curtails
many of Bangladeshis’ constitutional rights and
imposes a nighttime curfew. The election,
originally scheduled for January 22, has been
postponed.
Several months of pre-election turmoil came to a
head after the opposition alliance announced
earlier this month that it was withdrawing its
candidates and boycotting the election to protest
a voter list it claims the incumbent coalition
padded with millions of fictional names. More
than forty-five people have been killed and
hundreds injured in pre-election clashes across
the country over the past few months.
In a country that has seen two military
dictatorships in its thirty-five years of
independence, the possibility of an army takeover
always lurks in the background of any political
crisis. Whether the army’s intervention will be
temporary or long-term this time remains to be
seen.
President Ahmed’s resignation followed statements
from representatives of the United States and
Britain saying the election would not be credible
without opposition participation. The European
Union and the United Nations had withdrawn their
election observers, and a spokesperson for Ban
Ki-moon, the UN Secretary General, expressed hope
that the army "will continue to play a neutral
role."
For months Ahmed resisted opposition demands to
postpone the election, saying he had a
constitutional obligation to go ahead with it as
scheduled. Bangladesh’s unusual election system
charges a neutral caretaker administration with
taking over government and overseeing a
democratic transition, and the Constitution
requires an election within ninety days of the
handover of power. The handover was October 27,
which made the deadline January 25. Opposition
parties argued that serious constitutional
violations by the caretaker government — one
being that Ahmed, a member of the former
administration, put himself in charge — had
mooted the time requirement.
Ahmed’s resignation does not by any means resolve
the standoff between the two main political
factions. Indeed, it’s possible that the "chaos,
bloodshed and terrorism" that Ahmed said he was
trying to end with his resignation may actually
escalate.
The exigencies of Bangladesh’s fractured
political landscape have made for bitter
rivalries between the two main political parties
and some strange bedfellows within their
alliances. The incumbent coalition is headed by
the Bangladesh National Party, which was founded
in 1978 by the military leader Gen. Ziaur Rahman,
popularly known as General Zia. Now run by his
widow, Khaleda Zia, the BNP has its base among
conservatives and those who favor closer ties
with Pakistan and an Islamic vision of
Bangladeshi national identity. The BNP-led
coalition includes the more overtly Islamic party
Jamaat-e-Islami, whose stated goal is to make
Bangladesh an Islamic state governed by Islamic
law. Jamaat’s growing influence worries
secularists.
Leading the opposition alliance is the Awami
League, which has its roots in the independence
movement that severed Bangladesh from Pakistan in
the bloody Liberation War of 1971. Known then as
the party of a secular, democratic, socialist
Bangladesh, the Awami League was led by Sheikh
Mujibur Rahman, an almost mythical figure known
popularly as the Bangabandhu, or "friend of
Bengal." His daughter, Sheikh Hasina, now leads
the party, though her seventeen-party opposition
alliance has turned off some of the party
faithful because it includes the Islamist Zaker
Party, as well as the Jatiya Party of former
military dictator Gen. H.M. Ershad.
Without an election, it’s difficult to assess
exactly how much support each alliance has among
Bangladeshis. As protests snarled normal life in
Dhaka and across the country this week, however,
a certain amount of irritation with both sides
was evident among bystanders. "We ordinary people
always suffer because of the political parties,"
complained Hafez Mohammed Faruque Hossain, an
unemployed salesman who missed a job interview on
Monday because buses were not running and he
couldn’t afford the elevated rickshaw fares
charged during the strike. "It is not good for
anyone." It’s certainly not good for Bangladesh’s
economy, which was projected to grow 6.5 percent
this year. Now, Chittagong’s port is closed, much
foreign trade is suspended, investment decisions
are on hold.
For many of those who joined the protests,
however, the election standoff is not just about
one or another political party. Cries of "Joy
Bangla!“or”Victory to Bengal!" recalled the
hard-won triumph of the Liberation War, when
Bangladeshis gained their independence from
Pakistan and established their country as a
secular democracy. Awami League speakers rallied
the crowds by recalling that terrifying, hopeful
time and stoking fears that Jamaat-e-Islami is
seeking to create an undemocratic puppet state
for Pakistan.
"We don’t want to become a Talibanist state or an
extreme Islamic state where there will be honor
killing of my sisters or daughters," said
Mohammed Faruk Khan, a former opposition member
of Parliament, using a bullhorn to be heard over
the crowd in the Mohakhali section of Dhaka last
Sunday. "It is not only democracy, but it is our
economy and it is our very independence that is
at stake. We did not fight the Liberation War to
become a Muslim country. We fought the Liberation
War to become a secular country.“”Talibanist" is undoubtedly overstating the case.
And Islamic parties have far too small a
constituency to establish an Islamic state
anytime soon. Still, the International Crisis
Group warned in an October report that "a
creeping process of Islamisation is indeed
underway," and secularists have legitimate
worries that threats to democracy could create
openings for Islamic extremism in Bangladesh.
Attacks on micro-credit and women’s empowerment
programs, persecution of minority religions and
2005’s well-orchestrated bombing campaign have
forced Bangladeshis to acknowledge that militant
Islam has taken root in their secular soil.
Many secularists argue that it’s just a matter of
time before the “tolerant mass” will vanquish the
small but vocal extremist minority. They may well
be right. But it’s also true that the kind of
political chaos the country has seen lately
doesn’t help the case for democracy. And with the
two major parties mired in corruption,
criminality and organized violence, Islamic
parties like Jamaat-e-Islami benefit from
appearing disciplined, efficient and relatively
clean.
On Friday the sun warmed the Dhaka streets after
weeks of unseasonably cold weather. Under the
watchful gaze of armed police and soldiers,
people drove carefully and wandered around
shopping centers looking rather dazed. A group of
men stood outside the windows of a television
shop to watch the South Africa vs. Pakistan
cricket game. The evening call to prayer sounded
from mosques across the city. And, with the
resignation that comes from an excessive
familiarity with political uncertainty,
Bangladeshis waited to see what will happen to
them next.