During the run-up to the cancelled January elections, one opinion cut through the political polarisation and achieved some consensus among non-partisan Bangladeshis. Whether articulated by shopkeepers, drivers or high-level UN personnel, this viewpoint could be summarised thus: "The best thing for this country would be to throw the two begums into the Bay of Bengal." Recent events reveal that the military-backed 'caretaker' government (CG) shares this view, with both women struggling to keep their careers and dynasties afloat.

On 17 April, Bangladesh National Party (BNP) Chairperson, Khaleda Zia, succumbed to tremendous pressure from the CG and agreed to leave the country. Under virtual house-arrest herself, the arrest of her youngest son Arafat Rahman Coco appears to have finally broken her resolve to stay on, and she agreed to a deal to undertake a permanent pilgrimage to Saudi Arabia. In return, Arafat was released without being charged, while negotiations to enable Zia's jailed son Tarique to join his mother in exile continue.

The other begum, Awami League (AL) leader, Sheikh Hasina, has vowed to fight against 'fabricated' accusations of extortion and murder, but is stranded in the UK after her British Airways flight was refused landing permission in Dhaka by Bangladesh authorities. With official charges being brought by the metropolitan magistrate's court on 22 April, the military hopes these accusations, along with investigations about her family, might persuade her to prolong her overseas stay, especially if they are combined with a 'sweetener' to prosecute the killers of her father.

With the army's strategy to decapitate the country's political leadership in full swing, CG chief, Fakhruddin Ahmed, finally announced that the suspended parliamentary polls to elect the ninth Jatiya Sangsad would be held "before the expiry of 2008," giving the interim administration another 18 months in power. However, the absence of policy plans, accountability, or even a constitutional status, mean that the long-term legality of this unelected government is precarious.

For despite its remarkable popularity it could be surmised that this is largely occasioned by the low public esteem of the former kleptocratic civilian rulers. The anti-corruption onslaught is seen as effective by Bangladeshis because it has targeted the most powerful politicians in the country. However, precisely for this reason, the military has made some very influential enemies. Given the vitriolic political history of the country, these enemies will certainly not hesitate to seek revenge against individuals who they believe have unfairly singled them out for punishment following any future transfer of power.

The significance of this is that the regime is increasingly dependent on international support and its main internal constituency - business people and bureaucrats who have been conspicuously spared in the crackdown, despite comparable levels of corruption. Indeed, the military itself does not enjoy an unblemished record and it is telling that the attempts to sideline the leadership of the two political parties have been carried out extra-judicially - bypassing court proceedings that could reveal uncomfortable details.

Consequently, the anti-corruption drive that has legitimised the current government's position is unsustainable over the long run. Furthermore, as the honeymoon period ends, and with the BNP and AL leaderships exiled, attention will inevitably shift from the excitement of the anti-corruption campaign to the mundane business of ordinary governance. And this means that citizens will begin to question what they are receiving in return for the suspension of their civil rights - an issue the CG has deftly managed to evade so far.

Meanwhile, UN warnings to the army that lucrative peacekeeping contracts could be reconsidered if it is involved in behaviour incongruent with human rights standards, combined with pressure from organisations like Human Rights Watch, ensure that the military faces serious external scrutiny and a genuine threat of censure if events turn violent.

Unfortunately, with the main parties emaciated and a ban on political action, there is no forum for legitimate dissent. And, notwithstanding government efforts to appear benevolent, Odhikar, a local human-rights group, has reported over fifty deaths at the hands of law-enforcement agencies since January. Considering the history of conducting politics though strikes, hartals and demonstrations, one can envisage an escalation of violence, especially if the CG loses popularity with no viable alternative or outlet for opposition. This is why it is crucial to rebuild and re-democratize the entire political system immediately - both for the self-preservation of the military and the good of the country.

Considering their disastrous hatred for each other, the banishing of the two begums provides a tremendous opportunity for a more pluralistic politics to emerge in the country. Now is the time for Bangladeshi citizens and civil society to start a process of dialogue to articulate their vision for the future. Perhaps then the two begums will not take the prospect of a more democratic society into exile with them.