It has been over nine months since the fall of Sheikh Hasina's autocratic government in the 5 August mass uprising. How would you evaluate the success or failure of a democratic transformation of the state, that is, reforms and the new political settlement after the mass uprising?
Nurul Kabir: The historical commitment of Bangladesh, which emerged through a people's war in 1971 aimed at liberation from the rule and repression of Pakistan’s West-oriented undemocratic ruling class, was to build a democratic state founded on 'equality, social justice, and the human dignity of the citizens'. However, due to the authoritarian mindset of the various political parties and organisations within the ruling class of independent Bangladesh, it has not been possible to establish a truly democratic state in over half a century. Instead, different factions of the ruling class have, in pursuit of their narrow interests, nurtured the development of an exploitative and repressive authoritarian state, whose brutal face we saw during the July-August movement of last year.
In the past, various individuals and political organisations have spoken about the historical necessity of a "democratic transformation of the Bangladeshi state" and the establishment of a "new political settlement". However, it is through the recent mass uprising that the demand and legitimacy of such a political project gained significant popularity. But, due to the unclear perception of the interim government regarding the concept of a democratic state and due to the reactionary political outlook of some of its advisors, the possibility of achieving a democratic transformation of the state and a new political settlement has steadily declined over the past nine months. In fact, with the support of these advisors, the path is being expanded for certain reactionary political forces.
During the rule of the past government, freedom of expressed and independence of the media had diminished significantly. Since the interim government took over, how far has that situation changed?
Nurul Kabir: Since the interim government took over, the freedom of expression in the media, in general, has certainly expanded compared to the time of Awami League's autocratic rule. Chief Advisor Professor Muhammad Yunus has, in fact, repeatedly called for criticism of his government. We have continued to engage in discussion and criticism regarding the actions of his government, as well as his own various decisions.
As far as I know, the newspaper editors no longer are send veiled orders in messages about journalism from various state intelligence agencies, as they did during the Awami regime. However, as a vice-president of the Editors’ Council, I am aware that certain government advisors and some leaders of the popular uprising have already begun to show a degree of aversion toward the democratic freedom of the press, and in some instances, they have expressed unwarranted and adverse reactions. This is undoubtedly a dangerous sign. A justified and collective protest against this propensity is necessary.
It must be mentioned here that the interim government has filed murder charges against some pro-League journalists. This is unacceptable. While offering intellectual support to an authoritarian regime is a morally bankrupt political offence, it can never, in general, be considered a criminal offence under the penal code. Cases of financial corruption through abuse of power have also been filed against the concerned journalists. Those allegations can certainly be tried through proper investigation and a transparent legal process. However, the blanket filing of murder charges is completely unacceptable.
Prothom Alo :
Non-state actors referred to as 'mobs' are creating all sorts of obstacles to press freedom, it is alleged. How do you see this?
Nurul Kabir: In the course of waging a long struggle against an authoritarian regime, certain authoritarian tendencies may, unknowingly, infiltrate the minds of some among the activists. As a result, after the fall of that authoritarian regime in the face of the struggle, those latent tendencies within the victorious activists often are manifest in various reactionary forms.
In the present context, certain non-state individuals, though connected to the state, are displaying such tendencies, which at times are manifesting as mob action. If we are to advance the struggle for the democratic transformation of this country’s society and state, it is essential to wage a conscious and vigilant ideological battle against this tendency. We, too, must engage in that struggle. However, we must be careful not to label any legitimate protest by defiant youth as 'mob justice'.
The interim government used a law passed during Awami League’s term in 2009, to declared a ban on Awami League's activities. What is your opinion on this decision to ban Awami League?
Nurul Kabir: The interim government hasn't actually used the law passed during Awami League's rule to bank Awami League's activities. It has added certain provision to the law and declared a suspension of the party’s political activities until the trial of the League's crimes and the related legal proceedings are concluded. Before making this decision, the government obtained the approval of Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP), Jamaat-e-Islami, and NCP.
Anyway, the fact remains that the Awami League had established a rule of loot and plunder in this country by usurping the people's right to vote, holding farcical elections, and abusing the coercive powers of the state to cling to power. In order to suppress the democratic movement organised against these political and economic crimes and to remain in power, the League government killed 1,500 people within just three weeks and shot 20,000 others, leaving many of them permanently disabled.
Bringing such a political party, along with its authoritarian leaders, under trial is a just and correct step. The initiation of legal proceedings under this new legal provision to try the League’s mass killings has also paved the legal way for trying Jamaat-e-Islami as an organisation for its active support of the genocide carried out by the Pakistani military in 1971. Supporting any genocide conducted by any political party or government against its people is unjust anywhere in the world.
Only through a genuine democratic transformation of the Bangladeshi state, and of the country's mainstream politics and economy, can the growth of currently weak forms of extremist politics be prevented
Prothom Alo :
At a rally called by several organisations including the NCP demanding the ban of the Awami League, various objectionable slogans were heard. Even singing the national anthem was obstructed. Is any group opposing the Liberation War while opposing Awami League?
Nurul Kabir: Yes, at the rally organised by NCP demanding the ban of the Awami League, several slogans opposing the history of Bangladesh’s liberation war were chanted. These slogans were certainly objectionable. However, the positive aspect is that from the same rally, there was also appropriate protest raised against those historically inaccurate slogans. When the singing of the national anthem was obstructed there, it was also properly protested.
The relevance of a country’s national anthem can certainly be debated, and such debates can be resolved through various constructive discussions. But when those who actively opposed the people’s struggle for independence during Bangladesh’s bloody Liberation War question the relevance of the national anthem, it must be understood as a motivated underhand political act. This should not be tolerated by patriotic citizens who uphold democracy.
While it is true that Awami League politically led Bangladesh’s Liberation War, it is also true that apart from Jamaat and a few minor organisations, almost all other political parties actively participated in that war. Therefore, the false narrative supporting the Awami League’s monopoly over the liberation war of Bangladesh is unacceptable. In this context, under the pretext of opposing various political wrongdoings of the League after independence, there is no room to support opposition to the liberation war itself or to the popular spirit of the Liberation War.
It is possible to carry out constructive politics in Bangladesh while opposing the liberation war of spreading a distorted narrative concerning the liberation war?
Nurul Kabir: The liberation war took place almost 54 years ago. How can anyone oppose this victorious independence struggle? The question is, can constructive politics be practiced in Bangladesh while promoting a distorted narrative of that great people's war? No, it is not possible. When the Awami League and its political allies themselves failed to engage in constructive politics while promoting a partisan, that is, distorted version of the Liberation War, dividing the entire population under the slogan of “pro-liberation” versus “anti-liberation” forces, labeling thousands of freedom fighters as “anti-liberation,” fracturing the collective strength of the people in nation-building, and thereby obstructing the path to Bangladesh’s collective self-empowerment, how can others now expect to pave the way for constructive politics by promoting yet another kind of false narrative? It is impossible.
Only by recognising Bangladesh’s Liberation War as a "people’s war", acknowledging the contributions of various political streams within that war, and rebuilding the state and politics democratically in the spirit of the war’s core ideals - equality, social justice, and human dignity - can constructive politics truly be practiced in this country.
Prothom Alo :
Recently the New York Times published a report expressing concern about the rise of extremism in Bangladesh. What is your comment on this?
Nurul Kabir: When a country’s ruling class, its political party and its state institutions maintain an undemocratic, authoritarian, or repressive political order in society over an extended period, political protest in that society often takes on a form of "extremism". This is because authoritarian or autocratic regimes themselves are composed of elements of extremism, alongside other negative ideologies. In general, within Bangladesh, the authoritarian ruling class and its state, particularly the highly extremist League government over the past decade and a half, have given rise to a situation where even a relatively weaker segment of the opposition has, in reaction, gravitated toward extremism.
Only through a genuine democratic transformation of the Bangladeshi state, and of the country's mainstream politics and economy, can the growth of currently weak forms of extremist politics be prevented. Otherwise, various other types of political extremism will continue to emerge. This trend cannot be beneficial for the country. From the standpoint of democracy, it is now a crucial responsibility to carry out political and ideological struggle against all forms of extremism.
Alongside reforms, there is also a lot of discussions about the upcoming election. The government has repeatedly stated that the election will be held sometime between December and June. However, most political parties remain unconvinced. Whom do you hold responsible for this situation?
Nurul Kabir: Democratic reforms of the state and politics, and the holding of elections in all spheres of the state to ensure representative democracy, are not contradictory agendas. Both are essential. Some reforms are ideally to be implemented before the national election and some afterwards. It would not be appropriate to delay the election in the name of reforms, nor to disrupt the reform process in the name of holding an election.
It is true that although the interim government has repeatedly stated that the election will be held between December and June, many political parties remain unconvinced. The reason is that the government has yet to clearly announce exactly when the election schedule will be declared, or in which month.
Concerned persons are aware that there are individuals both within and outside the government who wish to delay the election and keep the interim government in power for several more years in order to secure various personal and partisan advantages. In this context, the lack of a clearly defined electoral timeline has led political parties to doubt the government's political intentions.
In the interest of ensuring the country’s political stability and economic advancement, this uncertainty and suspicion must be resolved. The interim government must bear in mind that the democratic principles of political parties do not support the idea of any government remaining in power for an indefinite period.
A humanitarian corridor to the Rakhine state, the transfer of operational authority over the port’s container terminal to a foreign company, are of great national importance and are bound to have far-reaching impact on the country. The interim government should not take such decisions unilaterally
What do you think about the interim government's performance? BNP has repeatedly been saying that the government is failing to maintain its neutrality. What do you say?
Nurul Kabir: Except for one or two specific areas, the performance of the interim government has not been satisfactory. Over the past nine months, there has been no visible positive change in any significant sphere of the state. Everything continues to function under the old system. Despite the public endorsement of the top leadership of BNP, the government has taken no initiative to arrest the party’s extortionist and land-grabbing activists. And if by "neutrality" you mean "political party neutrality," then even in that sense, there is some legitimacy to the BNP's complaints.
The interim government includes direct representation from the newly formed political party NCP which emerged from the anti-discrimination student movement. As a result, they have a level of influence over the formulation and implementation of major state decisions that others do not enjoy. This could potentially create a new kind of crisis in the near future.
Prothom Alo :
In the past, the interim government has held discussions with political parties when making decisions on many nationally important issues. However, there has been no such consultation regarding matters like the humanitarian corridor in Myanmar or the decision to hand over the management of the container terminal at Chittagong Port to a foreign company. Political parties are raising objections about this. What do you think of this?
Nurul Kabir: The interim government must always keep in mind that it does not possess proper legal legitimacy to govern the state. This government was formed based on a proposal from the student leadership of the victorious democratic movement against the League government's authoritarianism, with the support of various political parties involved in the anti-League struggle, as well as the cooperation of the military. The support of all these groups has granted the current government political legitimacy.
Therefore, before making any major decisions on behalf of the state that pertain to broader national interests, it is advisable for the interim government to consult with representatives of these forces, either jointly or separately.
Decisions such as whether or not to provide a humanitarian corridor to the Rakhine state, the transfer of operational authority over the port’s container terminal to a foreign company, are of great national importance and are bound to have far-reaching impact on the country. The interim government should not take such decisions unilaterally. As Bangladesh moves through a period of transition, it is essential to give importance to the collective vision of the country’s pro-democracy forces.
Prothom Alo :
Thank you.
Thank you too.