Govt opts to hold elections without BNP

Following the events of 28 October and the incidents onwards, numerous questions have been raised -- what will happen next and in which direction are the politics of the country headed? There are some other questions too – what will the government do in the coming days, how will BNP advance? As the election is scheduled to be held in January 2024, the opposition parties have been waging a movement demanding the restoration of an election-time neutral government. The question is whether thathas become too difficult to materialise.

It is undeniable that after the staged election in 2018, the government was extremely repressive. But the government has shown tolerance for the last one and half years. One of the reasons is the pressure of the international community, especially the US. The foreigners repeatedly called for an inclusive election, called to remain peaceful, and said that violence is been called unacceptable. What will the stance of the international community be?

To get answers to these questions, it is necessary to consider the incidents that took place around the BNP’s grand rally on 28 October. There is no way to forget the provocative speeches from the ruling party leaders, which carried threats of conflict before almost every programme held by BNP in the last one and a half years.

Since August last year, the ruling party didn’t only organise programmes to counter every BNP programme, they created uncertainty, citing the question of security to impose legal regulations or police permission. This was prevalent during the BNP’s grand rally on 28 October. Didn’t the declaration from the ruling party general secretary Obaidul Quader regarding taking control of every road and lane in the city create a backdrop for violence and clashes?

The threat to repeat the incidents of 28 October 2006 or 5 May 2013 cannot be regarded as a call for peace by any means.

Despite all this, the BNP has remained peaceful during its rallies since August last year. However, it can be recalled that the BNP headquarter premises were turned into a battlefield through a police raid on 7 December last year, three days before the party's grand rally on 10 December.

Hence, a question has arisen after the eventful 28 October as to whether the BNP has fallen into the government's trap. It is assumed in the question that inciting violence from the ruling block is legitimate, and the clashes in the BNP rally are initiated by the participants, which makes the party solely responsible for the violence.

Against such a backdrop, it is crucial to examine the developments of 28 October. The intention of shutting down internet service and disrupting information flow, as well as communication in the Naya Paltan area through a government order much before the rally, is definitely not to cooperate with the programme.

There is no scope to deny that BNP activists engaged in different types of clashes with the police in various alleys adjacent to the rally venue. It is crucial to consider the scale of the clashes, alongside the media reports on the festive environment in the BNP rally since the morning.

There were police raids from two sides of the rally before the formal commencement. It will not be wrong to assume that the situation would have come under control had the key speakers been able to deliver their speeches. It has been witnessed at different divisional rallies, on 10 December last year, and several rallies in Dhaka in July this year.

But the police adopted an attacking approach from the beginning on 28 October. Doesn't it indicate the police's intention to foil the rally?

Neither BNP not any major political party in Bangladesh are characterised by complete control of party leadership over each and every member, nor do the party men show utmost discipline.

So, it is undeniable that a small fraction of BNP men engaged in clashes with Awami League men and the police, and even attacked journalists. A policeman died during the clashes. These incidents are unfortunate and regrettable. It is imperative to hold the responsible ones on trial.

The death of the police officer in the clashes, a man being beaten to death by ruling party men, journalists and opposition activists being injured in police chases, tear gas and more, are unacceptable instances of violence.

At the same time, it should be taken into consideration that at least 15 BNP men lost their lives at the hands of the police and ruling party members from July last year to April this year. These are also instances of violence.

Yet, BNP held peaceful movements. Then why would they attack important infrastructure that would easily get them into trouble? Did police make any effort to divert the vehicles carrying Awami League leaders-activists from Kakrail, where the clashes ensued, where BNP men were present in large numbers?

It is now clear that the government has taken an aggressive stance centering the rally and the incidents afterwards. Perhaps this was to completely nullify the pressure created at home and abroad for dialogue with the opposition. The government now has opted to face BNP and opposition on the streets.

The government has taken such steps on 28 October to make way for the politics of Bangladesh to once again relapse into conflict. The peaceful movement of BNP and other opposition parties perhaps led the government to apprehend that it will have to compromise due to external pressure and public opinion if such a situation prevails. That has now been stopped.

The extent of arrest of opposition leaders has cleared the government’s intention that by taking advantage of such a situation the ruling party wants to hold a sham election. It is rational to deduce from the activities of Awami League that it perhaps wants to create an environment where the opposition activists would not only be repressed but also become barely able to take part in the election.

It is not that the opposition in Bangladesh is facing oppression because the violence and election is intertwined in the political culture of Bangladesh.

*Ali Riaz is the Distinguished Professor, Department of Politics and Government, Illinois State University, USA