Bangladesh — on the march to authoritarianism?
Clearly, this election does not reflect the will of a population far advanced from those early days.
The writer is a Senior Scholar at the Woodrow Wilson Center in Washington, DC and former US Ambassador to Pakistan and Bangladesh
Politically, Bangladesh has come full circle to the tipping point it faced almost 40 years ago. The election of January 5 brought one-party government back. History tells us that the next likely step is a consolidation of a one-party government into a one-party state. But history does not always determine politics. “It ain’t over ‘til it’s over,” and Bangladesh has a way of confounding pundits who predict its future. Remember, for example, that famous 1972 prediction that it would be (forever) ‘a basket case’.
The Awami League (AL) is now totally in charge. The Bangladesh National Party (BNP), the major opposition party, which polls said would win any free and fair election, even after two rather dismal previous turns in power, chose to boycott the election as it saw certain defeat in the absence of a neutral government to oversee the it. The result was predictable — the AL swept the polls and the BNP is completely shut out.
But politics aside, it is 2014 in Bangladesh. The chronic instability and near-anarchy, as well as the abject poverty that prevailed in 1975, have long since disappeared. Bangladesh, while still poor and in the stage of economic development where gains can easily be reversed, is now wired into the global economy with its vibrant garment and other export industries. Growth has been strong for most of the past two decades, and the country as a whole is much more prosperous. More importantly, it has a much more literate and healthy population because of the strides that have been made in mass education and in reducing gender disparity.
Clearly, this election does not reflect the will of a population far advanced from those early days. The AL claims a turnout of nearly 40 per cent in the 147 (of 300) districts in which voting took place. But neutral observers insist that even including the large-scale ballot-box stuffing at the end of the polling day, reliably reported by neutral observers, the number is no more than 20 per cent. Expert sources tell me the real turnout was likely closer to 12 per cent. In comparison, turnout in previous elections was about 86 per cent in 2008, 74 per cent in 2001, 75 per cent in June 1996 and 55 per cent in 1991.
But history shows that the ruling party of most one-party states started with elections, legitimate or not, which gave them power far beyond their popular support. These parties consolidated their position primarily by picking apart the opposition, putting its leaders in jail or into exile, cracking down with force on enemies and on their protests, co-opting others with the temptation of profiting from a share of the economic rents that come with political power, and quite often finding an ‘enemy of the state’ to justify their authoritarian methods. The AL government began this process before the election, putting a large number of BNP leaders in jail, and has followed up the election with more arrests. Its election campaign was based primarily on the assertion it was the bulwark against an Islamist onslaught — especially by the Bangladesh Jamaat-e-Islami (JI) — to turn the country into an Islamic state ruled by Sharia. The same drumbeat continues.
But the bulwark needed is one against a takeover of the state by a party bent on one-party rule. In a democratic system, it would be the next election. But will there be one before the opposition has been decimated? PM Hasina has turned rather coy on the timing of the next election. Will there be an opposition worthy of the name, or will it have been fragmented and effectively destroyed as a political force by the uncertain time of a future election?
This will be a historic challenge for the BNP. Its very existence and the political future of Bangladesh are on the line. Its answer should be to embrace a truly centre-right agenda, a transformational one with emphasis on democratisation and modernisation (rebuilding the independent institutions of the state), secular but inclusive, and which promotes its open and vibrant economy — an agenda that would appeal to the 48 million disenfranchised voters. Begum Zia should jettison the strategic alliance with the JI, but support a court that brings justice for the victims of the 1971 war, with the proviso that it be moved to a neutral country in which the perpetrators of crimes will find true justice. The hard part is that she should forswear dynastic politics — a pledge to democratise the party as well as the country.
Published in The Express Tribune, January 14th, 2014.
An opinion from a 1971 Bangladesh reporter of AP
Arnold Zeitlin
sad as it may seen, bill, it looks like hasina thinks her gamble on the elections has succeeded. (after all, there’s the irony of her getting congratulations from thai pm yingluck shinawatra who has a few similar problems of her own). so do others in Bangladesh, those who sort of pretend the whole exercise was somehow legitimate. as holiday weekly put it: “wrong is the new right in Bangladesh. everything that’s not right or truthful or genuine or whatever else, at this point in time, has to be considered acceptable, correct and factual.”
hasina must believe khaleda’s new, soft if tired line is a sign of weakess and defeat. khaleda may regret giving hasina a clear field in the election.
now hasina is back to harassing the news media, with the closing of intilab, and otherwise carrying on as if she achieved an electoral triumph. our friend, manju, has joined the cabinet, giving me a bloc there of three friends along with muhith and information minister hasanul haq inu. another friend, moudud ahmed, still is in jail aslong with colleagues.
the English-language website of manju’s ittefaq without a hint of irony reports hasina says that “for the first time, the power was transferred to an elected government by an elected government through a democratic system and election”. the paper also carries an op-ed article by the ambassador to the us., akramul qader, describing the election as “fair, free and transparent”. the new age contends that khaleda’s party lacks coordination and is “out of touch” even while it reports the “this government has elevated the level of tyranny, coercion and repression to a new creative level.”
the daily star says the BNP is weak and has run out of steam as a result of a backlash against her boycott. mahfuz anam, to be sure, has condemned the process by which the awami league “brutally, ruthlessly and according to plan used state power to ‘hijack’ the just concluded election and deny people their right to vote just to ensure its stay in power.” he’s even gone beyond your label of a one-party government to proclaim a “one-person state”. but mahfuz and others have been on the wrong side of history since 2007 when they willing to let the military have a go at the two ladies.
hasina is not only coy about fresh parliamentary elections, she’s planning upazila council elections for February — and some BNP leaders are thinking wisely of competing.
you’ve gotten the “one-and-a-half party election” you speculated about in november.
accountable, popularly elected government in Bangladesh has always been in danger but now it has taken a near-fatal hit. for the time being, the country is too worn down to do anything about it. bangladesh’s international donors have offered little beyond lip-service condemnation. there’s no sign of a “bulwark…against a takeover of the state by a party bent on one-party rule.”
please stay in touch. best wishes to all for the new year, both 2014 and the new year of the horse.
Arnold Zeitlin; Visiting Professor; Guangdong University of Foreign Studies, Guangzhou, China Managing Director; Editorial Research & Reporting Associates (ERRA)
Centreville, Virginia 20120, U.S.A.
