|
|
 
| |
|
State of denial
The Economist, UK
http://www.economist.com
June 16, 2005
Extremism is a worry in Bangladesh; but it's the mainstream that is polluted
DHAKA: THE most densely populated of the world's big countries, Bangladesh
is also among the most sparsely covered by the international press. This
is in part the government's choice: it makes it hard for foreign journalists
to visit. When they do, it tends not to like what they write, especially
recent suggestions that Bangladesh is witnessing a rise in Islamic extremism,
and becoming a haven for international terrorists. The government is right
that claims of “Talibanisation” are exaggerated. Bangladesh
remains a relatively liberal and tolerant place. But it is becoming less
so, and that is a concern.
Rich-country diplomats say that whereas, three years ago, their main
focus was on economic development, it is now on defending democracy. Later
this year, a number of such countries, who meet informally in Dhaka as
“the Tuesday group”, are planning to hold a conference on
the conduct of free and fair elections.
This is the burning issue in Bangladesh. Elections are due next year.
Already, the main opposition, the Awami League, led by Sheikh Hasina Wajed,
is threatening a boycott, alleging government attempts to rig the poll—this
despite Bangladesh's unique system of conducting ballots under the eye
of a supposedly neutral caretaker government. A boycott would formalise
the deadlock between the League and the Bangladesh National Party (BNP)
of Khaleda Zia, the prime minister. It is the bitterness and lack of trust
between these two women and their parties that has hijacked the democratic
process, and encouraged the growth of extremism.
The government says that if the League were to boycott the election,
it would do so merely in fear of defeat. A recent poll has suggested the
BNP might indeed win—in part because of the popularity of a brutal
campaign against alleged criminals. Odhikar, a human-rights group, claims
that 168 such people have been killed by security forces, “in crossfire”,
in the first five months of 2005.
The Awami League is justifiably suspicious of the government. In August
last year, 23 people were killed at one of its rallies in Dhaka in a grenade
attack. Sheikh Hasina herself was lucky to survive. In January this year,
another party leader, Shah A.M.S. Kibria, a former finance minister, was
also killed in a grenade attack. A number of people, including members
of the BNP, were arrested for Mr Kibria's murder. But no one has been
charged for the earlier crime.
These spectacular attacks are only the most visible symptoms of the disease:
endemic political violence, in which both big parties are implicated.
Local heavies act as their enforcers, in return for protection from politicians
with sway in the police and judiciary. Odhikar reports that 526 people
died in political violence last year.
The League says the BNP is hostage to two of its three junior coalition
partners, Jamaat-e-Islami and the smaller Islamic Oika Jote (IOJ), both
Islamic parties. It says that the BNP turns a blind eye to violence by
Islamic extremists, and to all sorts of encroachments on Bangladesh's
traditional tolerance.
Take the fate of Bangladesh's Ahmediya minority, who number some 100,000
out of a population of about 140m. Regarded as apostates by some Muslims,
many have in the past 18 months been victims of a campaign of discrimination,
expropriation and violence, documented in a report published this week
by Human Rights Watch, a lobbying group. In January last year, at the
insistence of the IOJ, the government banned Ahmediya publications. The
law minister, Moudud Ahmed, concedes this was “a big mistake”,
and says that the ban will be overturned in the courts.
There are also concerns that women are under pressure to wear the veil,
that some traditional entertainment is being suppressed, and at the spread
of Islamic schools teaching purely religious doctrine. But there are many
forces in Bangladesh beside Islamism. The economy has been growing at
a steady 4-6% a year for a decade. Bangladesh does much better than India,
for example, in educating girls, and the success of microcredit lending
is giving women improved status and income.
The BNP's Mr Ahmed insists the party leads a “centrist, slightly
right” government. Jamaat's leader, Motiur Rahman Nizami, the industry
minister, describes his party's main objective as “a welfare state
based on the moral and social values of our religion”, but says
it will pursue this through democratic politics. Jamaat's student wing,
however, known as Shibir, has a history of violence, and Jamaat's opponents
claim it has links with terrorist groups. Of these the most notorious
is the Jagroto Muslim Janata, led by a thug known as Bangla Bhai, once
a Shibir activist. Despite claiming Islamic credentials, and reports (which
he has denied) that he once fought for the Taliban in Afghanistan, Bangla
Bhai seems more like a gangster, engaged in a local power struggle.
Foreign diplomats say outfits like Bangla Bhai's do have links to international
Islamic groups, but that they are not extensive. Of greater concern is
the attitude of the BNP government: at first utter denial that the Islamists
even existed; then, since February, when it banned the group, a half-hearted
effort to eradicate it. India faces similar denials when it takes Bangladesh
to task for allegedly harbouring some of the many separatist groups fighting
in India's north-east. Even Manmohan Singh, India's mild-mannered prime
minister, is exasperated: “We can choose our friends,” he
commented recently, “but we cannot choose our neighbours.”
Bangladesh will be an even less attractive neighbour if the election
leads to the breakdown of the political system, and, such is the animosity
between the two big parties, this is possible. As it is, the judiciary
and parliament are weak and dysfunctional. Neither party has a real interest
in building strong checks on executive power. So elections become winner-takes-all
contests. The biggest loser could be the country.
Background:
Since gaining independence in 1971, Bangladesh has suffered three military
takeovers and 19 attempted coups. The country is presently governed by
Khaleda Zia, whose Bangladesh Nationalist Party won a landslide victory
over Sheikh Hasina Wajed, the prime minister, in Bangladesh's 2001 election.
The two women are locked in an intense personal feud; Sheikh Hasina, who
leads the opposition Awami League, rejected the election result. She was
lucky to survive an assassination attempt in August 2004.
Poverty, corruption and lawlessness are big problems in Bangladesh. Religious
minorities claim persecution is rife. An enormous number of non-governmental
organisation workers are active in the country, but aid is being thwarted
by political wrangling and development is limited. The constant menace
of floods and typhoons is another hurdle.
Bangladesh could export some of its large natural gas reserves to India,
but nationalist sentiment and deteriorating relations between the neighbours
makes this politically unpalatable. After September 11th, Bangladesh has
been accused of harbouring Islamic terrorists: the chaotic political scene
both undermines democracy and encourages extremism.
http://www.economist.com/World/asia/displayStory.cfm?story_id=4085719
|
|
|
|
|
