TBS
Campaigning for the national election formally kicked off on 22 January with large rallies, policy-themed dialogues and highly charged rhetoric from the two competing political alliances.
On one side stood Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) Chairperson Tarique Rahman, launching his campaign through a mix of youth dialogues, public rallies and regional tours. On the other were Jamaat-e-Islami Ameer Dr Shafiqur Rahman and National Citizen Party (NCP) convener Nahid Islam, jointly inaugurating the 10-party alliance’s campaign.
From the outset, the contrast between the two sides was apparent — not only in policy emphasis, but also in tone, symbolism and the political identities they sought to project.
Keep updated, follow The Business Standard’s Google news channelYet beneath the surface-level differences, analysts warn that both camps are rapidly converging toward a campaign dominated less by policy debate and more by negative, identity-driven confrontation.
BNP’s Day One: Policy meets sharp attacks
Tarique Rahman’s first day on the campaign trail was unusually dense in policy proposals.
Speaking at the “Youth Policy Talk” in Sylhet and later at mass rallies, the BNP chief outlined plans on decentralised democracy, healthcare, overseas employment, women’s welfare, environmental protection, and agriculture.
“Democracy should not remain confined to the national level,” Tarique said, arguing that without strong union parishads and municipalities, civic services cannot be delivered effectively. On healthcare, he acknowledged systemic constraints, noting that “patients cannot wait” for large hospitals to be built, and advocated public–private partnerships and community-level health workers to reduce pressure on tertiary facilities.
His economic messaging focused heavily on skills and employment. Many Bangladeshis, he said, migrate abroad unskilled, limiting their income. BNP’s solution is modernised technical education, language training, and overseas job preparation — particularly for markets such as Japan, Europe and the Middle East.
Social protection formed another pillar of the BNP pitch. Tarique promised “family cards” in the name of female heads of households, offering monthly assistance of Tk2,000–2,500. He framed the programme as both welfare and empowerment, arguing that women reinvest such support in children’s education and healthcare.
However, alongside this policy-heavy agenda ran a sharply confrontational rhetorical line. At rallies in Sylhet and elsewhere, Tarique repeatedly attacked Jamaat’s historical role in 1971, accused unnamed rivals of promising “paradise” to voters — calling it “shirk” and “deception”— and warned of conspiracies involving postal ballots, NID collection and foreign interference.
“Not Delhi, not Rawalpindi, but Bangladesh first,” he declared, invoking sovereignty while implicitly accusing opponents of external allegiances. He also prayed on stage and pledged that he would try to fulfil the ideals of the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH). He even joked about the hidden Jamaat supporters within BNP’s ranks by saying “Gupto, gupto!”
In statements from both sides, we saw far more negative campaigning than policy-based debate. What this leads to is a shift away from explaining why people should vote for me and towards emphasising why they should not vote for my opponent.
Jamaat–NCP Alliance: Moral absolutism, reformist language and a new leader of July Uprising
In contrast, Jamaat-e-Islami Ameer Dr Shafiqur Rahman’s opening address in Mirpur-10 leaned heavily on moral language, justice narratives, and the symbolism of the 2024 July Uprising. He pledged an end to extortion, corruption, and “the selling of justice”, vowing that “justice will be ensured for all, irrespective of religion or party affiliation”.
Jamaat’s rhetoric framed the election as a moral reckoning rather than a technocratic choice. “The honour of mothers and sisters is our red line,” Dr Shafiqur said, repeatedly emphasising women’s safety and dignity. He also rejected cash-transfer politics, mocking the BNP’s family card proposal by asking whether “Tk2,000 can solve a family’s problems,” and warning that such schemes would only breed corruption.
Nahid Islam, speaking from the same stage, took a more explicitly reformist and structural tone. He framed the election not as a contest for power but as a referendum on the “structure of power,” positioning the 10-party alliance as the inheritor of the July movement’s anti-discrimination ethos.
“People do not want flats; they want a safe life and dignified employment,” Nahid said, directly countering BNP’s housing and welfare promises. He also questioned whether family cards would reach beneficiaries without bribes, accusing the BNP of recycling old patronage politics.
“The mutual attacks are poisonous. They are harmful to ordinary people… Their mental space is being occupied and polluted by artificial divisions instead of real issues… Countless women took part and workers died [in the July Uprising]. To declare one party the champion… is a betrayal.”
Negative campaigning takes centre stage
Despite the apparent contrast — BNP’s policy density versus Jamaat–NCP’s moral-reformist rhetoric — political analysts see a troubling convergence.
Asif Shahan, professor at the Department of Development Studies, University of Dhaka, argues that both sides are already privileging negative campaigning over substantive policy debate.
“In statements from both sides, we saw far more negative campaigning than policy-based debate,” he said. “What this leads to is a shift away from explaining why people should vote for me toward emphasising why they should not vote for my opponent.”
He warned that such rhetoric inevitably produces polarisation, “One side will be framed as pro-reform and the other as anti-reform. This ‘us versus them’ framing will be based on antagonistic identity politics rather than on reform itself.”
Shahan also cautioned that conspiracy narratives — already circulating — could escalate rapidly.
“It begins with insults, then conspiracy theories. After that comes disinformation, threats and wholesale confrontation politics,” he said, adding that once campaigns reach that stage, “there is no credible route back to policy-based politics.”
Dilara Choudhury, former professor and chair of the Department of Government and Politics at Jahangirnagar University, offered a more differentiated assessment.
Comparing Tarique Rahman’s and Dr Shafiqur Rahman’s speeches, she argued that Jamaat’s leader appeared more concrete on certain issues.
“Between the two, I believe Dr Shafiqur Rahman’s remarks are more credible,” she said. “He spoke clearly against extortion and addressed women’s safety directly. In contrast, many of Tarique Rahman’s statements were vague — general calls for ‘security’ without sufficient specificity.”
She noted that explicit commitments to women’s safety and maternal security resonate strongly with voters.
“That is what women want,” she said. She added, “Nahid Islam affirmed Dr Shafiqur Rahman as a ‘hero of July,’ stating that this alliance stands for July and for reform. Taken together, both made positive statements.”
“Between the two, I believe Dr Shafiqur Rahman’s remarks are more credible. He spoke clearly against extortion and addressed women’s safety directly. In contrast, many of Tarique Rahman’s statements were vague — general calls for ‘security’ without sufficient specificity.”
A toxic trajectory?
Veteran political commentator and columnist Altaf Parvez was more categorical in his critique. He described the opening exchanges between BNP and Jamaat as “deeply toxic” for society.
“The mutual attacks are poisonous,” he said. “They are harmful to ordinary people, particularly the lower-middle and middle classes. Their mental space is being occupied and polluted by artificial divisions instead of real issues.”
Parvez was especially critical of the NCP’s symbolic politics surrounding July. He argued that by elevating Jamaat as the principal custodian of the uprising, sections of the new political forces were erasing the roles of women, workers and other groups who paid the highest price.
“Countless women took part. Workers died in large numbers,” he said. “To declare one party the champion of the uprising is a betrayal. It feels like the final stage of political collapse.”
He also viewed BNP’s turn toward overt religious symbolism as reactive.
“As for Tarique Rahman’s attempt yesterday to project a religious image — praying on stage and so on — it raises the question of whether he is trying to compensate for the longstanding narrative that BNP is anti-Islam. Seeing his principal opponents deploy religious symbolism more aggressively, BNP appears to be responding by using a religious card of its own, as far as possible.”
Where is the campaign headed?
Day one of the campaign revealed two competing narratives: BNP’s attempt to combine policy-heavy governance promises with nationalist, religious and historical rhetoric vs. the Jamaat alliance’s bid to claim moral and reformist high ground rooted in the July Uprising.
Yet, the dominant trajectory appears less about policy competition and more about delegitimisation, symbolic ownership and identity-based confrontation. If day one is any indication, the central question is no longer which policies will dominate the campaign but whether policy will dominate it at all.
As Asif Shahan put it, “The more we focus on negative campaigning, the less likely it is that we will see negotiation, reform, or policy-based dialogue.
Source: https://www.tbsnews.net/features/panorama/day-one-campaign-policy-pledges-identity-politics-and-drift-towards-confrontation
