Is Bangladesh going to see the national elections held by December this year? If not, when will the electoral roadmap be announced? Should completing reforms or the trial of Sheikh Hasina really be a precondition for holding the national polls?
These are some of the issues that are currently being widely discussed in the public domain.
Now, those who oppose the status quo may ask: What has been the mandate of the interim government to bring major changes? How far-reaching is it? For how many days? Other than sending the fascist forces to the ‘underground’, what are the tangible achievements in improving the delivery of the services of the state?
Such debates slightly heat up the atmosphere in our drawing rooms, office compounds, commercial places, campuses, and political space. As a result, the optimistic talks of bringing the national progress to a new level are turning into certain despair.
On the other hand, the mirrors of this society have become so opaque that it is hard to understand who are more confused with the current situation – the silent majority or the hyperactive players in society, politics and closer to power?
There was no arrangement to measure what the people think and want even during the reign of the elected governments, other than one day’s ballot. In the past 15 and a half years, the people had been stripped off of the right to exercise their right to vote only for a day.
The exception is the July-August 2024 revolution which led to the political changeover on 5 August.
Thus, a new perspective has been created for building a new Bangladesh for future, and it’s necessary to prepare a plan of action to realise the objectives of the revolution. And the responsibility of doing so was of almost all but fallen ruler Hasina and her collaborators. Those who represent higher number of people (should have) had higher level of responsibility in that regard.
For a government which had been formed following the unorganised revolution that took place all of a sudden, it’s tough, let me admit, to have readymade terms of reference. But, what’s wrong if we had made a list of rational expectations as against the evil acts committed by Hasina and her gang?
The responsibility of such a grand task is not just a herculean one for the present leadership but may also bring lasting consequences for the upcoming generations.
We seem to ignore our own insinuation that the unwanted consequence of failure to realise the opportunities coming out of the revolution may be a prolonged anarchy. To be practical, we should have taken into consideration the possibility of hatching conspiracies by evil forces to hamper law and order and distress public life.
I wonder if a jurist of history will ask in 2071 how successfully Nobel Peace Prize winner Professor Muhammad Yunus and his team entrusted with the state responsibility following the people’s demonstrations spanning July and August 2024, had been able to fulfill the spoken and unspoken public expectations of the revolution. The tasks that can help give answer to such a question still remain largely unfinished.
The special feature of the current interim administration, in comparison to any other government of the past, is that this one is neither a political regime of Professor Yunus’ personal agenda, nor is it a typical caretaker government; rather this one is an authority appointed after the fall of the fascist forces, to act on behalf of all in society.
Since the people of this country do not want to see this government failing, the stakeholders of the revolution inclusive of the political forces would have determined the terms of reference for the Yunus administration.
What is now being dubbed ‘proclamation of revolution’ or manifesto, should have been made public by this time, in order to implement the revolutionary agenda and evaluate the performance of the administration in this respect.
The government itself could have prepared a list of tasks to launch its mission to serve the nation at a critical juncture of history, securing better mutual understanding of it. As a result, there could be clearer idea of the character and responsibilities of the government; the cynics would have remained silent as well.
For its mandate is being questioned, the government would have sought the people’s opinion about its programmes and priorities, through referendum, public engagement or national dialogue.
There is nothing wrong in renewing the public mandate; rather it is a necessary step, although a national consensus was built through the bloody resistance against the fascist rulers. The resistance movement marked the victory of the conscientious forces against Hasina and her evil forces.
However, there is no guarantee either that today’s conscientious ‘force’ would side with fairness or be considered as the ‘force’ having people’s approval forever.
Instead of focusing on public welfare, development and democratisation we often get entangled into altercations over trifling matters. And that’s what Hasina’s men really want, at the moment
Hasina herself and her Awami League, too, bragged about being the sole agent of the spirit of the liberation war and actually turned the country into a satellite state. Claiming themselves to be the torchbearers of the vote o bhaat’er rajniti (politics of vote and livelihood), they had embraced the ultimate path of fascism.
The people’s victory against anti-people, anti-state oligarchy brought all other forces in society to the same line at a historic moment on 5 August 2024.
In fact, desperate for eliminating the opposition forces and enslaving the people for more than one and a half decades, Sheikh Hasina has made herself along with her team and collaborators irrelevant in Bangladesh politics. Lest we forget, she had established a fascist rule taking advantage of the democratic process and in the name of (fake) democracy.
The basis for Hasina’s governance was making sure that all others in society were excluded from her beneficiaries – the Awami League and the ‘prime minister’s men’. That’s why it’s urgent to bring institutional changes for building a new Bangladesh.
For example, in order to ensure free and fair elections in the country what is more important is reform in the electoral system that has been destroyed by Hasina. Her standard of ‘good governance’ is not also expected any more.
To speak candidly, it’s essential to carry out overall reforms in the state to reverse the trends of the fascist era.
All social elements including political forces are the obvious stakeholders of such reforms and the role of the government there is of a facilitator.
In this context, there is no alternative to having communications strategy proper of each of the parties to avoid any misunderstanding in interactions, publicly, formally, and informally. Of course, the government is the strongest organisation and it is supposed to play a higher responsibility.
Not ideally being subservient to any political party, the Yunus administration has the moral obligation to attain collective goals and objectives, keeping the political groups and others in confidence.
If we all join in unnecessary debates and the responsible people indulge in complacency or are dragged into old-fashioned controversies, the nation may lose the great opportunity to accomplish great objectives at a historic moment.
Other than doing the most critical institutional reforms, it is the responsibility of the statesmen to meet the rational demands of the people, be it the Yunus administration or the next elected regime.
The gang of robbers of Hasina had ruined the capacity of the government and society to carry out those routined welfare activities. The inevitable outcome of the ruining includes massive corruption, injustice, state-sponsored terrorism, social discrimination and disparity and dwarfing of the citizens.
Unfortunately, instead of focusing on public welfare, development and democratisation we often get entangled into altercations over trifling matters. And that’s what Hasina’s men really want, at the moment.
All the more important public interest issues including restructuring of the state, legal and institutional reforms, strengthening democratic values and overcoming the challenges of development, should be dealt with, as consistent priority tasks of any government.
However, the public expectation is that the Yunus government would carry out successfully its historic responsibilities, especially resolving the most urgent issues for future political harmony.
The list of tasks for setting the goals of future government may be better prepared today to see tomorrow’s list more enriched, so that future leaders can dream today of taking Bangladesh to a new height of progress in all respect.
* Khawaza Main Uddin is a journalist.