Home Contact Us
Search :
   

Bangladesh - Articles

Print Bookmark Email Facebook Subscribe
#269, 4 October 1999
 
Internal Politics in Bangladesh: An Insight
Saswati Chanda
Research Scholar, Jawaharlal Nehru University
 

The recent three-day total nation-wide strike in mid September was called by the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) due to the government decision on July 28,1999, to permit transshipment of goods to north-eastern Indian states. The opposition’s decision can be cited as a pretext to resort to oppositional tactics of destructive agitational politics to wrest power from the ruling Awami League. The ruling party though a trifle unnerved, described it as a ‘failed coup’. The staggering blow it dealt to the country’s economy generated severe criticism from varied multi-lateral and bi-lateral donor agencies whose aid to the tune of US $2,000mn every year serves as the base for an otherwise unstable economy mired by recurrent natural disasters.

The internal political scenario in Bangladesh, ever since its liberation in 1971after a bloody and bitter struggle for independence has been marked by extreme volatility, violent changes of government, military coups and agitational politics both constructive and destructive. These have caused grave damages further undermining its already dismal economic performance that has put her almost at the bottom of Asian developing countries. 

The three important tasks the nation has faced since its inception can be categorised as under: 

·                     To fulfill the democratic aspirations of the people through a participatory system of government which had not been possible in United Pakistan.

·                     To evolve an economic structure that could not only promote growth but also remove exploitation and injustice from the society.

·                     To establish a national identity based on history, language and cultural heritage. 

However, the past decades create an impression of an era of missed opportunities and misdirected efforts.

The nation inherited a dual tradition of governance-extreme populism on the one hand and authoritarian personal rule on the other. The country after its birth had a populist government headed by the charismatic leader Sheikh Mujibur Rahman. Within a span of three years, however he had to resort to authoritarian rule to deal with growing political opposition and economic crises. The subsequent rule in Bangladesh after him could be categorised into four modes of governance:

·                     Direct military rule or martial law regime;

·                     Multi-party democracy with a strong executive;

·                     Authoritarian rule with a democratic facade; and

·                     Parliamentary democracy with a titular executive.

The years of military rule since Mujib’s death witnessed strong institution destroying proclivities of the ruling elites to consolidate power. The military rule failed to fulfill its promises to the people, of order and discipline in society alongside a resurgent economy. On the other hand transition from military rule to civilian regime led to many distortions in the political process of the country.

The multi-party system of Zia-ur-Rehman and authoritarian rule of H.M.Ershad produced strong executives, ‘rubber stamp’ parliaments, subservient bureaucracy, weak judiciary and ruptured political institutions. The authoritarian regime of General Ershad particularly witnessed serious erosion in norms and values of major institutions of government.

The dual tradition of governance also produced a major distortion in political participation. While democracy has been the most favourite political ideology to Bangladeshi people, authoritarianism and military rule negated the realization of that idea. Desperate efforts to replace military-authoritarian regimes led to a dominant perception among Bangladeshi politicians and political parties that agitation, hartals and strikes have become the main instruments for change of government. Politicians could, therefore, hardly see or spell out democratic governance in terms linked to effective public order and authority. Democracy has been presented to the mass of people as an abstract ideal---a struggle to change or overthrow a government.

As a result, the present Awami League government ever since its return to power in mid 1996 has faced severe criticism from the opposition for its supposed proximity to India, the most recent of them being the transshipment issue. Another issue that has alarmed the opposition is the Awami League’s effort to bring to justice those responsible for the assassination of Sheikh Hassina’s father Shiekh Mujibur Rahaman, following the death sentence awarded to 15 out of the 19 accused, by a lower court and awaiting Supreme Court’s approval. 

The opposition BNP led by Khaleda Zia which had come to power following mass upsurges and joint oppositional resistance in 1991 was forced out of office by early 1996, by the then opposition Awami League (AL), whose policy of ‘non-cooperation’ entailing street protests and disruptive strikes made the country totally ungovernable. In the present political scenario the opposition has adopted a similar stance against the ruling AL in its bid to regain power in alliance with the former President General H.M.Ershad and the fundamentalist parties like the Jammat-E-Islami and the Islamic Oikya Jote.

While Bangladesh is considerably fortunate to enjoy considerable homogeneity as a nation, its political elites often espoused seemingly irreconcilable beliefs, symbols and values creating stress and instability. Oppositional forces have thus lived upto the fear of them becoming increasingly dysfunctional and violent due to their constant pursuance of destructive agitational politics. The party in power is thus being increasingly driven towards adoption of intolerant and repressive attitude---resulting in a political crisis and hence ‘crisis of governance’. 

Print Bookmark Email Facebook Subscribe
IPCS Columnists
Af-Pak Diary

D Suba Chandran
Across the Durand Line: Who is in Control Now? Will That Change?
Taliban Talks and the Four Horsemen: Between Peace and Apocalypse
Pakistan: Talks about Talks with the Taliban, Again
Dateline Islamabad

Salma Malik
Pakistan and TTP: Dialogue or Military Action?
The Musharraf Trial & Beyond

Dateline Kabul

Mariam Safi
Afghanistan, US and the Peace Process: A Deal with the Taliban in 2014?
Dhaka Discourse

Prof Delwar Hossain
Bangladesh: Domestic Politics and External Actors
Bangladesh Post Elections 2014: Redefining Domestic Politics?

Eagle Eye

Prof Chintamani Mahapatra
US in Asia: A 'Non-Alignment' Strategy?
Indo-US Strategic Partnership Post Khobragade: The Long Shadow
East Asia Compass

Dr Sandip Mishra
North Korean Peace Gestures and Inter-Korea Relations
Japan: Implications of Indiscriminate Assertiveness
China, Japan, Korea and the US: Region at Crossroads

Himalayan Frontier

Pramod Jaiswal
Chinese Inroads to Nepal
Constituent Assembly-II: Rifts Emerging
Nepal: The Crisis over Proportional Representation and the RPP Divide
Maritime Matters

Vijay Sakhuja
Increasing Maritime Competition: IORA, IONS, Milan and the Indian Ocean Networks
China in the Indian Ocean: Deep Sea Forays
Iran Navy: Developing Long Sea Legs

Middle Kingdom

DS Rajan
China in the Indian Ocean: Competing Priorities
China-Japan Friction: How can India Respond?
Nuke Street

Amb Sheelkant Sharma
Nuclear Security Summit 2014 and the NTI Index
Nuclear Power: An Annual Report Card

Red Affairs

Bibhu Prasad
Maoists in the Northeast: Reality and Myth-Making
Surrender of Gudsa Usendi: Ominous beginning for the Naxals?
South Asian Dialectic

PR Chari
Federalism: Centre as Coordinator and Adjudicator
Limits of Federalism

Spotlight West Asia

Amb Ranjit Gupta
Saudi Arabia-US Estrangement: Implications for the Indian Subcontinent
Syria Today: Is Regime Change the Answer?
The Arab World: Trying Times Ahead
Strategic Space

Manpreet Sethi
US, China and the South Asian Nuclear Construct
Responding to Pakistan’s Tactical Nuclear Weapons: A Strategy for India

The Strategist

Vice Admiral Vijay Shankar
Strategic Non-Nuclear Weapons: An Essential Consort to a Doctrine of No First Use
 

OTHER REGULAR contributors
Gurmeet Kanwal
Harun ur Rashid
N Manoharan
Wasbir Hussain
Rana Banerji
N Manoharan

Ruhee Neog
Teshu Singh
Aparupa Bhattacherjee
Roomana Hukil
Aparupa Bhattacherjee


 

Browse by Publications

Commentaries 
Issue Briefs 
Special Reports 
Research Papers 
Seminar Reports 
Conference Reports 

Browse by Region/Countries

East Asia 
South Asia 
Southeast Asia 
US & South Asia 
China 
Myanmar 
Afghanistan 
Iran 
Pakistan 
India 
J&K  

Browse by Issues

India & the world  
Indo-Pak 
Military 
Terrorism 
Naxalite Violence 
Nuclear 
Suicide Terrorism 
Peace & Conflict Database 
Article by same Author
Bangladesh-Pakistan Relations: The Dawn of a New Era

Islamic Fundamentalism in Bangladesh: Domestic and International Ramifications

Land Reclamation: Indo-Bangladesh Maritime Dispute

India and Bangladesh: Enclaves Dispute

The Ganges Water Sharing Treaty: Genesis & Significance

Indo-Bangladesh Relations in a Changing Strategic Environment

Indo-Bangladesh Relations: The Trans-shipment Issue

ADD TO:
Blink
Del.icio.us
Digg
Furl
Google
Simpy
Spurl
Y! MyWeb
Facebook
 
Print Bookmark Email Facebook Subscribe
Year 2014
 January  February  March  April  May  June  July  August
 2013  2012  2011  2010  2009  2008  2007  2006
 2005  2004  2003  2002  2001  2000  1999  1998
 1997
 
 

The Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies (IPCS) is the premier South Asian think tank which conducts independent research on and provides an in depth analysis of conventional and non-conventional issues related to national and South Asian security including nuclear issues, disarmament, non-proliferation, weapons of mass destruction, the war on terrorism, counter terrorism , strategies security sector reforms, and armed conflict and peace processes in the region.

For those in South Asia and elsewhere, the IPCS website provides a comprehensive analysis of the happenings within India with a special focus on Jammu and Kashmir and Naxalite Violence. Our research promotes greater understanding of India's foreign policy especially India-China relations, India's relations with SAARC countries and South East Asia.

Through close interaction with leading strategic thinkers, former members of the Indian Administrative Service, the Foreign Service and the three wings of the Armed Forces - the Indian Army, Indian Navy, and Indian Air Force, - the academic community as well as the media, the IPCS has contributed considerably to the strategic discourse in India.

 
Subscribe to Newswire | Site Map | IPCS Email
B 7/3 Lower Ground Floor, Safdarjung Enclave, New Delhi 110029, INDIA.
Tel: 91-11-4100 1900, 4165 2556, 4165 2557, 4165 2558, 4165 2559 Fax: (91-11) 41652560
Email:
© Copyright 2014, Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies.
        Web Design by http://www.indiainternets.com