Present-day Bangladesh is a severely fractured society. Deepening political polarisation and recent developments questioning the country’s secular credentials have only added to its woes. Should India be concerned?
BY Sreeradha Datta
BY Sreeradha Datta
The Director of the Maulana Abul Kalam Azad Institute of Asian Studies in Kolkata.
Published in- http://www.gatewayhouse.in
on
on
19 MAY 2016
There have been several developments in Bangladesh in
recent times. Most significantly, 11 May 2016 — the day Motiur Rahman Nizami, Jamaat-e-Islami
chief and erstwhile minister, was executed — will go down as a red-letter day
in its history as many Bangladeshis waited 35 years to witness his execution
for war crimes during the 1971 Liberation War. It was an electoral promise
Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina fulfilled by setting up the Bangladesh War Crimes
Tribunal that has, to date, prosecuted 20 collaborators like Nizami and ordered
the execution of five.
Another electoral promise Sheikh Hasina upheld was to
introduce various domestic legislations, including proscribing terror groups to
address terrorism and extremism in Bangladesh . As evident, given past
trends, several of those engaged in terror — who also carry out violent
physical attacks — enjoy linkages with Bangladesh ’s largest religious
political party, the Jamaat-e-Islami, or its affiliates.
Terror attacks in the last few years have taken on a scary
form. Bangladesh
is no stranger to political violence, but the trend of periodic attacks against
certain section of individuals is unprecedented. Beginning with the killing of
bloggers in 2013, to the latest attacks on a university professor, gay rights
activists, and a sufi preacher within a span of a few days, it is significantly
ominous. These audacious macabre killings in and around Dhaka seem to follow
the hit list of over 80 writers released by a group, the Defenders of Islam, as
reported by a section of the media.[1] The resolute attacks against writers, as
well as authors, professors, and
activists, including foreigners—in fact, on individuals who wear their secular
credentials openly—points towards a proselytized group that vociferously
opposes personal liberty and the right to free speech.
Present Bangladesh
characterises a severely-fractured society. The political polarisation runs
deep with the two main political parties representing contrasting political
hues, values, and ethos. The opposition—Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) that
=rose out of the barracks—has always taken a rightist position while the ruling
party—the Awami League—has historically stood for liberal socialism. However the recent developments, and the government’s
seeming inability to address , raise several questions as its secular
credentials.
Although there have been over 20 fatal attacks in and around
Dhaka in the last two years, there has only
been a handful of arrests. Apart from some routine denouncement and laying the
blame on the BNP and Jamaat, no serious
measure has been taken to deter the violence.
Some members of the ruling party have even expressed cynosure against
the victims—all liberal thinkers—for being “non Islamic”, rather than against
the perpetrators. The real concern is actually the non action and rather muted
voices against the growing menace of vigilante killings. While a section of
people are scared into silence, the impudent groups enjoying the support of
rogue elements appear to be emerging stronger with every attack that goes
unpunished and unchallenged.
Although the Jamaat political party has been banned, its
large infrastructural support and economic network remains unaffected. Arguably,
ideologically religious groups have greater affinity with the BNP, recent
incidents point to the Awami League attempting to cohabit with them. The
presently anchorless but deeply indoctrinated Jamaat sympathisers are only too
ready to be given new membership. Given the high electoral stakes, Awami is
unable to risk sending this disparate but effective group into the folds of the
BNP. Political exigencies have led to Awami League repositioning itself as a
concession towards the religious political entities it seeks not to alienate, in
recognition of the changing domestic mood. The blatant show of Islamic
religious strength underscores the emergence of conservative Bangladesh . Bangladesh once
showcased as a moderate Islamic country is in regressive mode. Religious
appeasement is invariably prevailing upon the liberal cultural identity that
had led to the vision of “sonar bangla” as an independent nation.
Ironically, while the Islamic State and Ansar al-Islam (linked
to Al-Qaida) have claimed to be behind some of the attacks, the Bangladeshi
government squarely denies their presence on their soil. Political a in Bangladesh
cannot be delinked fromreligious identity. Given this scenario, through their
use of force, the perceived followers of Islam are undeniably posing a serious
threat to the nation’s identity and national security.
Yet, India-Bangladesh bilateral relations remain at an all-time
high. From the signing of the comprehensive agreement in 2010, the two
neighbours have only strengthened their ties, largely enabled by Bangladesh addressing India ’s core security concerns. Both
sides continue to reiterate “their unequivocal and uncompromising position
against extremism and terrorism in all forms and manifestations….”[2], but
another quiet transition seems to be underway, reflecting in the changing
situation on the ground in India ,
specifically in West Bengal, which borders Bangladesh .
Political violence and acts of terror have visited certain
quarters of West Bengal . The October 2014
blast at Khagragarh, Burdwan, yielded fresh evidence of cross-border terror
groups linkages. Permeable borders have provided Islamic groups from Bangladesh with easy access into West Bengal ,
encouraging a dangerous trend. The proliferation of a small arms cottage
industry in the surrounding areas provides sustenance to such criminal elements.
Clearly, the unofficial figure of nearly 30% of the population belonging to the
Muslim community has its impact on the electoral arithmetic in West Bengal . While the growing contact between similar
cross-border groups are not fully known, West Bengal
is not immune to its domestic electoral compulsions and might well be turning a
blind eye to a dangerously unfolding situation. Unfortunately, measures against
home-grown terror elements/groups have often been perceived biased and has
restricted the Indian/state/Bengal government’s actions.
A case in point is the anti-Shahbag rally held in Kolkata in
March 2013. Briefly, a particular incident involving the secretary general of
the Jamaat during the war crime trials led to a spontaneous popular movement in
Dhaka . Connecting through the virtual world, youth
and bloggers gathered at Shahbag in Kolkata to protest against the
“collaborators” of the Liberation War. The Shahbag movement gained huge support
overnight from a wide cross section of Bangladeshis, but was not able to
sustain itself. In addition to other factors, the movement largely weakened on
account of the ire it invariably invited fromreligious groups in Bangladesh . Gradually,
the Islamists gained ground and launched several anti-Shahbag movements not only
in Bangladesh , but also in
neighbouring West Bengal . Ironically, in sharp
contrast to erstwhile Bengal ’s liberal
political atmosphere few months prior, the request from a group of
intellectuals from Kolkata to organise a peace march, to express solidarity
with the Shahbag movement, was turned down.
Clearly, a section of people in Bangladesh are desperately trying
to drive its political and social agenda in a particular direction. Political
short sightedness prevents leaders on both sides to act decisively against such
a phenomenon. The ongoing situation in Bangladesh is fraught with dangers to both state
and society, and India
will not remain immune to its negative spinoffs unless it is careful.