The mayoral election results: Is the AL situation that bad?

The AL was banking on war crimes trial trials, hartal misery and BNP’s poor political performance to do well and nail the political coffin of its opponents but the urban voters seem to have decided that it wants to send a message albeit an unpleasant one to the ruling party. It was an unexpected loss for the AL and an unexpected victory for the Opposition.

Yet people are cautious about saying that it’s a ‘wave’ despite the huge margin of winning votes because there is no groundswell of opinion as such for the BNP. However, it’s a reverse groundswell that may be at work which is an anti-AL wave though rather silently it appears. The national election which was once expected to be a cakewalk for the AL is suddenly not a confirmed win. Will the 15^th amendment be enough to ensure a victory with or without the Opposition’s participation?

* * *

The general feeling was that the BNP-JI alliance had suffered severe damage since the war crimes trials began and was in no position to respond to the electoral challenge. This is a standard analysis of political incumbency which assumes that voting decisions are taken on party position basis only or by party workers. The elections proved that public political behaviour is probably quite beyond the understanding of the parties and voters’ motivation is a mystery to both. However, losing in all the four major cities is a big blow to the image of the AL and cracks are appearing as the AL leaders are fighting with and blaming each other for the loss. The idea of voters not committed to parties is still a new idea to the politicians it appears.

* * *

The war crimes trial was a crucial election issue and the ‘Islamist’ factor was supposed to turn it into a runaway victory for the AL. But this has mattered very little in the urban areas where it’s still an issue. It seems public interest in the trial is more about justice or revenge seeking than politics. The trial in fact neither adds nor diminishes the political image of any of the parties because war crimes are in effect a non-political issue with roots in history. The parties may see it as a political chess piece but people see it as a national demand outside politics. The BNP allowed Jamaat-e-Islami back into politics for political convenience and the AL is holding trials for the same reason. The moral space which the AL hoped to gain through the holding of trials was lost because it’s seen as a party willing to a core of corruption. The stigma is no longer about the individuals of the party but the party in general.

The AL was using the ‘Afghanistan’ bogey all the time forgetting that this bogey doesn’t have the kind of impact on ordinary people as much as it has on the Shahbagh types. The war crimes tribunal didn’t seem a confident court when the AL supporters refused the verdicts and generated the Shahbagh movement. The ‘second liberation war’ seemed to have fizzled out and the political gains can’t be counted now. The AL had placed too much money on this horse perhaps hoping people will not remember the law and order situation or the corruption scene. It didn’t work it appears.

* * *

The Padma Bridge corruption issue, by most accounts, seems to be a more significant issue. It doesn’t matter if money didn’t change hands. People are convinced that it’s a case of corruption and that conspiracy to corruption is as strong as actual corruption disagreeing with the AL administration’s excuse.

The Hallmark scandal, the Destiny scandal, the share market crash and several others have added to the burden. Government nominated bank directors were involved in the loan scams according to most media reports so it has been read as a government sanctioned corruption.

Tarique Zia was an individual who along with others were supremely corrupt during the BNP era but how is Hasina’s regime any different as of today?

The other part is that the memory of Tarique’s corruption has faded and it’s the latest AL ones that people remember.

* * *

The AL has also shown scant respect for the voters as it has treated them as fools. The Tazreen fire, the Rana Plaza collapse and the ultimate lack of concern for the RMG workers are issues that the incumbents have ignored. The poor were not better off under the BNP but they are not under the AL either. The AL has also tended to protect the guilty with party linkages at all costs and the Biswajit case is the best example. The Sagar-Runi murder case investigation and arrest farce is another. The home minister seems to think that the people believe whatever they are told like his famous ‘norachora theory’ but a string of murders and crimes have been left unresolved making people think that law and order is in short supply and the urban voters are unhappy about that.

* * *

But what can it mean for the BNP? Very little since people hardly support them but people don’t support the AL either as they did in 2007. The undecided vote base has expanded even as people suffered under hartals which mean its politics that is disliked rather than the issues. BNP has little to offer in terms of alternatives. Its gain is almost exclusively due to AL’s incompetence and its lack of interest in public welfare.

* * *

But many people are also sceptical about the entire elections and smell something fishy in such a sweep. They say the AL deliberately lost the municipal elections so that when the parliamentary polls come they will sweep it claiming its victory part of a fair elections regime which began with the June polls. Who knows if that is true but it does show that people’s confidence in the political system is as low as it can get. The parties no longer have credibility and now the electoral system itself has probably lost it.

It’s a scary situation if people no longer believe in their electoral defeats. It’s much worse when they have no faith in their victories as well.

A BNP victory is not impossible anymore and its workers are probably energised by the results but given Bangladesh, a lot may happen before a national election is held.

Source: Bd news24