 The political mindset doesn't seem to be in place for such a comfortable sharing of power.. After all, despite positive statements from BNP Chairperson Begum Khaleda Zia upon the release of Awami League President Sheikh Hasina, the latter did not reciprocate. Quite to the contrary, the release of Begum Zia and Tareque Rahman, and the subsequent sending abroad of the latter, incited vitriolic response from the Awami League camp. Their reaction was bitter. Conveniently turning a blind eye to the charges of corruption levelled against their own leaders, Awami League leadership labelled Khaleda Zia as a thief of the highest order. Suranjit Sengupta said that BNP would first have to apologise for the August 21 grenade blasts before any dialogue could take place. Columnist Muntasir Mamun, known to be of the Awami League ilk, penned articles in the same vein in the Bengali daily Jugantar. With such vitriol out in the open, is power sharing between the two plausible? Unlikely, to put it mildly. This blatant enmity certainly poses as an obstacle to the government's efforts for consensus, for a smooth run towards the election. Sharing power? In an attempt to bring about consensus rather than confrontation, the government is determined to bring Begum Khaleda Zia and Sheikh Hasina together in dialogue; but can they actually manoeuver a meeting with a tangible outcome? The plot thickens. Or is it unravelling? The give-and-take game between the government and the political parties continues to seesaw. The government has given in to the demands of the political parties to hold the upazila election after the national polls. The political parties, on their part, are agreeing to the government's plans, albeit with a few reservations, particularly from the BNP camp.. So everything seems hunky-dory and the stage is set for the national elections to be held on December 18 this year. Under the circumstances, the question that is repeatedly being asked by the public, will the election take us back to the clichéd Square One? Will the country once again see one of the major political parties in power and the other one in opposition? If so, what was the point of 1/11? Political analysts, though, realise that things cannot be all that simple and straightforward. There are more tricks up the sleeves of the powers-that-be than can be seen by the naked eye. It is believed by many that the much-touted national government is still very much on the cards. From hazy uncertainty, recent developments on the national scene have been giving things a more concrete shape. Specific dates and other features of the Chief Advisor's recent address to the nation have cleared the haze to a large extent. But is the picture below clearer or is their more haziness to penetrate? Say politics analysts, the picture of a credible election in December 18 followed by the upazila polls, and then the transition back to a democratic government all seems a mite too easy given the stakes involved. The Khaleda-Hasina dialogues The government has called for dialogue between the arch rivals Begum Khaleda Zia and Sheikh Hasina. Khaleda Zia has acquiesced and Hasina may too, even if under pressure. But where will this lead? Since the propagators of 1/11 surely do not want to slip back to a post-1/11 scenario, for the sake of the nation and their own, do they hope that a Khaleda-Hasina dialogue will lead to a balanced sharing of power? Do they foresee a government of consensus between the two? Utopian high hopes, to most minds. The political mindset doesn't seem to be in place for such a comfortable sharing of power. After all, despite positive statements from BNP Chairperson Begum Khaleda Zia upon the release of Awami League President Sheikh Hasina, the latter did not reciprocate. Quite to the contrary, the release of Begum Zia and Tareque Rahman, and the subsequent sending abroad of the latter, incited vitriolic response from the Awami League camp. Their reaction was bitter. Conveniently turning a blind eye to the charges of corruption levelled against their own leaders, Awami League leadership labelled Khaleda Zia as a thief of the highest order. Suranjit Sengupta said that BNP would first have to apologise for the August 21 grenade blasts before any dialogue could take place. Columnist Muntasir Mamun, known to be of the Awami League ilk, penned articles in the same vein in the Bengali daily Jugantar. With such vitriol out in the open, is power sharing between the two plausible? Unlikely, to put it mildly. This blatant enmity certainly poses as an obstacle to the government's efforts for consensus, for a smooth run towards the election. Unresolved issues Actually there are quite a few bumps along the mapped road to the election. Among these, four unresolved issues feature prominently. These are the state of emergency, registration of the political parties, the debarring clause for election candidates, and the matter of constituency delimitation or demarcation. The most important point of concern for the political parties as well as the omnipresent international community, is the state of emergency. The experiment carried out of elections under emergency, in the form of the mayoral polls, proved that this can be done and can produce violence-free results. But the national election is another matter and the political players involved are not eager to campaign and contest under emergency conditions, however relaxed they may be. It is to be seen if the government will concede to this demand too and lift emergency in due time (and time is running short). Says a political analyst, in the event that emergency is lifted, the government will lose its legitimacy. It will not be possible to keep the many political prisoners behind bars. The whole system can collapse like a house of cards at the snap of a finger. The government has hinted at a very relaxed form of emergency wherein all freedoms will be accorded — freedom of speech, of movement, et al.. How practical can this be. Many within the government are not too comfortable about this and find it to be an unsettling issue. As for registration of political parties, none of the political parties were keen on this clause. In fact, perhaps it was only Jamaat-e-Islami and a few of the minor parties that could really fully meet the criteria for registration wit the Election Commission. The Election Commission, in its determination or desperation to adhere to the Road Map, is willing to make concessions in this clause to, so as to enable the major parties to register. Awami League is ready to meet the Election Commission half way, stating that it will make the necessary amendments so as to be ready to register after Eid-ul Fitr. BNP has its reservations, but a section of its leadership has declared its willingness to go for registration. The demarcation or delimitation of constituencies was also a problem, but the matter is likely to be resolved shortly. This is not likely to prove too great an obstacle to overcome. Plus two, minus many? It is the debarring clause for candidates that is a thorn in the flesh for the political parties, particularly for the top leadership. It is not likely that either Khaleda of Sheikh Hasina will agree to stay away from directly contesting in the polls. That means the "minus two" formula will not be carried out. In fact, observers say, rather than the "minus two" formula, the government may opt of a "plus-two, minus-many" formula. That means many of the big-name politicians, other than the two leading ladies, may find themselves behind bars before the election. BNP will be hit hardest in that case. On the other hand, if the "minus two" formula is carried out, further controversy will brew. It is quite clear that if Khaleda Zia stays away from contesting in the national election, there is no other leader presently in BNP that can fill the chasm. In such an event, Jamaat-e-Islami leadership will clinch the leadership of that camp. And then, at the end of the election, when the question of power sharing comes, will Awami League steer away from its professed ideology and form a consensus government with Jamaat? Such a scenario can hardly be palatable to Awami League. Thus the conundrum of the debarring clause gives rise to many possible consequences. So with the two leading in full strength in the fray, the entire 1/11 process falls into question again. And if they remain away, then too controversies arise. The power-sharing paradox While power had seemed just within hand's reach for Awami League, not too long ago, the equations suddenly changed with the release of Begum Zia. Popularity and the power scales suddenly dipped in favour of BNP, and Awami League was no longer so confident of the terra firma under its feet. Awami League, say insiders of the party, smells a rat. They are worried of a behind-the-scenes agreement between Khaleda Zia and the powers behind the government, perceived to be the army. That was why, they feel, Khaleda Zia was so ready to agree to the possibility of a consensus government. She has nothing to lose. As for Jamaat, they stand to gain too. As pointed out previously, if Khaleda Zia refrains from directly contesting in the polls. Jamaat will come to the forefront of leadership. This has Awami League worried and that is why Hasina is still not committed to a consensus government. Government of consensus Sources say that government circles have been talking of a consensus government involving the two major political camps, but with the incumbent caretaker government as a partner too, to ensure the reforms and other agenda goes through within the term of the new government. It may even be a transitional government of a short (perhaps two-year term) term [See Transitional Government for Constitutional Reforms, PROBE Vol. 7, Issue 03, July 11-17, 2008]. Having been hit hardest by 1/11, BNP needs a breathing space and such a consensus government may be just the answer. When Hasina had been released, she initially was very agreeable to a transitional government too. But now with Khaleda Zia herself and Jamaat as a party gaining in strength, the scenario has changed. Spirit of 1/11 be damned An evaluation and analysis of the recent unfolding events, the Chief Advisor's speech and the basic body language of the advisors speak volumes. They are giving into almost all of the demands of the political parties — arrested leaders have been released in quick succession, the upazila election which the Election Comission was so adamant to hold before the national polls has been postponed, the 'no vote' clause has been suspended, registration criteria has been relaxed and so on. The general feeling is that the council of advisors at this point of time couldn't care less about reforms, the anti-corruption drive, accountability and all those lofty ideals they had entered the scene with. It is as if their mantra now is — "Spirit of 1/11 be damned, hold the elections and let us free." Rather than saving the nation, they are now out to save their own skins. That, say observers, is the reason of Chief Advisor Dr. Fakhruddin's hasty speech on the eve of his departure to the US. With the Chief Election Commissioner staunchly maintaining that the upazila election would be held before the national polls, Fakhruddin was leaving nothing to chance. By announcing the national election would be held first, he left no room for the Election Commission to adhere to its stubborn stand. There is obviously a gap between the Election Commission and the caretaker government. Whatever Road Map the Election Commission may have had in mind, Fakhruddin and his advisors seem to have a single road map — election and escape. Any façade of commitment they may have had has now vanished into thin air. Semblance of civil rule International powers have always featured in local politics, more so with the intensely globalised world of today. They have their interests, obviously, and instability can't always deliver the goods. Sources say, the superpower wants at least a semblance of civil rule in Bangladesh. Overt support for a military regime can hardly be acceptable, so perhaps a civil frame with the khaki dictating terms may be a part of the scheme of things. That is conjecture, of course, but not to be dismissed lightly. If even a puppet civil rule is to be in place, how civil can the rule actually be if BNP and Awami League are to share powers? This is one instance where opposites do not attract! |
__._,_.___
[Disclaimer: ALOCHONA Management is not liable for information contained in this message. The author takes full responsibility.]
To unsubscribe/subscribe, send request to alochona-owner@egroups.com
Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe
__,_._,___