Won't political consensus be required for a roadmap?
The word "consensus" has gained much currency in recent times. But the area or issues of consensus are not really clear. There are all sorts of shortcomings in the efforts to create consensus. The task to create consensus must also be seen as an ongoing political effort. There are several political groups and quarters involved. New competition has also emerged. Everyone's aspirations must be brought to one place by means of clear understanding.
My observation in this regard is, the matter of creating a consensus is being viewed in a very bureaucratic manner. Creating a consensus is not bureaucratic. This is a political matter. There is a matter of creating confidence. If we speak of creating consensus politically, we have to take into consideration that there are several competitors in the political arena, they have various viewpoints and demands, but there is something greater than all this. And that is to keep the interests, development and advancement of the country above everything.
Bangladesh is a pluralistic country. It has a long history of coexistence among people of various views and ideologies. Any sort of extremism, whether left or right, will not bode well for Bangladesh
If we fail to create a political consensus, will we enter a fresh crisis?
Bangladesh is always in a crisis. Today there may be a natural disaster, tomorrow it could be a political crisis and another day some other crisis! Crises are nothing to be scared about. But why should there be any needless crisis?
For example, there may be two strong points of view and both sides have their arguments. This should not be viewed as a crisis. The challenge is how to merge these varying views, how to create a consensus by means of political understanding.
I see some clear shortcomings here. The causes of such crisis lie in the working style of the interim government. The government's use of MCQ exam method to pinpoint areas of consensus is something innovative, but obviously come from the head of an expert who works at a desk or from a bureaucratic mindset.
Prothom Alo :
Over the last few months there has been much talk about reforms. What is your observation about reforms?
Hossain Zillur Rahman
Reform has become a catchword in recent times, but what are reforms actually? From the very outset there has been a perception that reform means to shake everything up and bring about large structural changes. We must see where the reforms are needed. I feel it is necessary to look at the necessity of reforms from three angles.
Firstly, there is need to step up the efficacy of our state machinery. We have an expansive state machinery, but it has massive shortcomings in providing the expected services and doing so dynamically. There is a lot of paperwork, but all this is held up due to the lack of implementation capacity. Whether it is the health sector, the education sector, one-step service or whatever, the main objective of the reforms must be to bring about radical changes in the state machinery's operational and service mindset in these areas.
The biggest obstacle in this area is the deep-rooted administrative culture where cronyism and dominance rules over merit, efficiency and service-oriented mindsets. The matter of the administration cadre must be mentioned here, as well as the propensity to render the local governments powerless. Also to be mentioned here is the unwarranted dominance by the various narrow-minded politicised professional groups in departmental work.
Secondly, there is need for reforms in the power structure and power distribution. A part of this task is to identify specific structural areas and areas of application in order to address the autocratic propensities. The other part is to come up with recommendations for effective changes to create consensus through understanding.
The main pillars of the autocratic rule for the past 15 years were extreme empowerment of the prime minister's position, establish an MP rule in the areas, and extreme and cruel misuse of the police administration and judicial administration. If reforms are not carried out in the power structure of at least these three areas, it will not be possible to establish any meaningful reforms.
Outside of increasing the effectiveness of the state machinery and stemming autocratic propensities, there is a third viewpoint that is relevant in discussions on reforms. That is about certain reforms to create a developed society. There was a time when we were a poverty-ridden country. Now we have a sort of financial capability and various dynamic aspects of society have emerged. There is opportunity to expand the scope of our demands for livable cities, an improved standard of connectivity, a knowledge-based society. This will require new thinking and innovations. These too are a part of reforms.
If viewed from these three angles, there will be a link between the people and the reforms. This will enhance the acceptability of reforms. Why do we want reforms? The bottom line is that this will make people's lives a bit easier, a bit better. They should feel that they too are stakeholders in this country. They have the right to contribute to building the future of the country. But I note a unilateral propensity in the talks that are taking place on reforms at present.
In recent times there has been a lot of talk on 'new political settlement'. How far is our progress in this regard?
Hossain Zillur Rahman: The term 'political settlement' has perhaps come from some theoretical exercise or the academic world. But I am now rather concerned and a bit worried because just as in the case of reforms, there is no presence of the people in the discussions on political settlement. There is a noticeable elitist approach in these discussions. These seem to be talks on a "higher level". The new party that has been formed bandies around with terms like "reforms", "political settlement" a lot, but they too seem to have an elitist approach.
Political settlement is not an issue for the political players alone. The people must have a stake in this too. It is an elitist concept to think that only those in the field of political competition or in the economic field, will be the ones to create the political settlement. If the settlement is created in this manner, the interests of the elite will take precedence of the interest of the people.
Everyone claims to be given the responsibility by the people, empowered by the people, that they are morally entitled. But in the true sense, where are the people? Where is the voice of the people in these discussions? The biggest factor that I find missing over the past seven months in state activities and in the political area, is the people.
Prothom Alo :
What could be the process to involve the people?
Hossain Zillur Rahman
If we look at the government, we will see that the members of the advisory council basically restrict themselves of office work. They are totally absent from work related to people's involvement. But in the present circumstances, this should be their main function, I feel.
It is up to the politicians to decipher how they will be involved with the people. If that is their intention, then it will be visible. Have they tried to sit with the farmers and understand the problems in agriculture? Have they sat with the workers to understand their problems? Factories are closing one after the other. Are there any discussions with the industrialists, the businessmen as to why investment is at a standstill and what could the solutions be?
There are perhaps some formal talks. But these are very one-sided. Only a few people talk and the others are merely audience. These talks do not create any linkage with the people.
Students have always played an important role in our political history. They have had significant roles in various struggles, movement and even in toppling governments. But the students have never before directly wanted a share in power. But for the first time they have become part of the government and later they formed a party too. How do you view this?
I view political participation or forming a political party in a positive light. As the party is new, I do not want to make any conclusive comment now. We need to see what change in political culture the new party is talking about.
We are referring to the new party as a party of students and youth. Why do we talk about youth separately? Youth is not just a matter of age. When we talk about youth, the matter of ideology should get emphasis. There will be a greater willingness to sacrifice. There will be more innovative thinking.
It is seen that even among the new party, the discussions revolve around power. Their statements are like this, "They didn't do right when they were in power and so we need to come to power." There is very little discussion on becoming an advanced and capable political force to be evaluated by the people in order to come to power.
The new party also has the old political culture. There is that "showdown type" politics. This is an costly matter of display and public campaign, just as in the case of old politics. So how will a new political culture be created?
Let's come to the issue of the election. There is a debate over when the election will be held. A debate has also arisen as to whether the election will be inclusive or not and whether everyone will be able to participate in it or not. To put it bluntly, what should the consideration be about whether Awami League, Jatiya Party and other parties that were involved in the past autocratic government can participate in the election?
Hossain Zillur Rahman: I have a certain clear stand in this regard. In principle I feel that the next election should be inclusive. I do not think the doors should be closed for anyone. The July-August spirit is all about not leaving anyone behind, but the inclusion of all.
The complication that has been created here is that the past autocratic government had to exit in the face of public anger. Many people were killed at the orders of that government, many were injured. The entire country was plunged into a sort of mental trauma. These are unpardonable crimes.
Such crimes against humanity must be tried. Other than that, those who were involved in massive financial scams during the past government must also be brought to book. The election commission can disqualify them from participating in the election on legal grounds. Such accused persons can be declared to be unqualified to hold any party position.
But it would not be prudent to ban any party or exclude them from the election by means of executive order or administratively. Such a decision would set precedence for the future. This would not bode well. That is why rather than banning any party, stress must be placed on bringing the criminals to trial.
Alongside bringing those involved in crime face to face with the law, as a party Awami League should seek apology and express its regret. They must prove to the people that they have undergone a change. Only when these phases are complete can the question of participating in the election arise. After that it is the people who will decide upon Awami League's future.
There has recently been talk on a "refined" Awami League. My opinion on this head is that Awami League itself must determine how, under what process, they will "change" or "reform". It would not be right for any other quarter to facilitate this. The bottom line is, the change must come from within the party and through their initiative and efforts.
Prothom Alo :
Recently quite a stir was created by the statement of a National Citizen Party leader about the army being involved in rehabilitating Awami League. We know the army played a vital role in the mass uprising. Are such accusation or doubts and suspicions concerning the army warranted in the prevailing circumstances?
Hossain Zillur Rahman
Firstly, such a situation is certainly not warranted and it is fortunate that this did not get out of hand. All quarters must realise that Bangladesh is amid adverse geopolitical circumstances. Our relations with the neighbouring country are cold. Under such circumstances it is imperative for the powers and forces of the state to be consolidated and united.
The army is one of the main pillars of our state strength. Immature statements made on the spur of the moment that can weaken these powers and render them controversial are extremely harmful. We must be alert about minor issues or narrow partisan or individual interests that can escalate into a huge problem. The rehabilitation of Awami League must not become a state agenda. After all, this party faces charges of massacre, crimes again humanity and financial crimes.
Certain quarters are issuing warning about the rise of religious extremism in Bangladesh again. What do you say?
While there are certain examples of religious extremism in Bangladesh, there is also oversimplified views about the matter. Then again, there is the propaganda and the campaigns from the neighbouring country. Tackling extremism is not just a matter of law and order. This needs to be tackled philosophically and politically.
Bangladesh is a pluralistic country. It has a long history of coexistence among people of various views and ideologies. Any sort of extremism, whether left or right, will not bode well for Bangladesh. Alongside being alert, any sort of provocative activities must be tackled with administrative skill and ideological initiatives.
Prothom Alo :
Thank you for your time.
Hossain Zillur Rahman
Thank you too.
*This interview appeared in the print and online edition of Prothom Alo and has been rewritten for the English edition by Ayesha Kabir