With two days left for the 10th parliamentary elections, Begum Khaleda Zia must be seriously questioning her decision to sit them out and wondering where does she go from here.
While Khaleda had made her intentions of not contesting elections under a government headed by Sheikh Hasina known much earlier, the die was really cast after the election commission announced the poll schedule in late November.
Not only did the BNP not file nominations, but it has launched a series of hartals and blockades since October 26 to force the legitimate government of Sheikh Hasina to step down in favour of a neutral caretaker government.
In this endeavor, the BNP was ably supported by the goons of the Jamaat and its student body. They provided the muscle power to unleash violence that reminded old-timers of the Jamaat's role in 1971. For the Jamaat, the agenda was simply to derail the war crime trials that were coming to an ominous conclusion when the past sins of their leaders were finally catching up with them.
Despite doing their best, or rather worst, despite all the violence and destruction of public property, the BNP-Jamaat were not able to shake the firm resolve of Sheikh Hasina, who knew all along that the law and the Constitution were on her side.
For Khaleda Zia, this must have been galling. When the situation was reversed in 1996, Sheikh Hasina was able to mount a far more effective campaign and ensure Khaleda's exit. Clearly, Khaleda wants to pay Hasina back in the same coin, but has failed miserably so far.
Also Read
Worse, Khaleda has frittered away a golden opportunity to do well at the hustings. Several opinion polls had shown the BNP winning a majority. But, it was Khaleda's ego that refused to let her go to elections under her arch rival.
Ego apart, Khaleda also seems to have mis-read the international mood. While there was a lot of talk of the need for a neutral government to conduct polls and appeals made by the UN Secretary General downwards, there was always the nagging feeling that what Sheikh Hasina was doing was sanctioned by the Supreme Court and the Constitution. Hence, the international community could not go beyond a point.
Khaleda miscalculated this totally. She had banked on pressure from the international community coupled with street violence to forcibly eject Sheikh Hasina.
To make matters worse for Khaleda Zia, the events of the last month have brought about differences with the Jamaat.
Since November 25, 2013, when Khaleda Zia announced the protest programme it was the Jamaat that was in the forefront of the violent agitation. In the process it had lost many of its members and leaders while the BNP stayed in the background, hoping to reap the benefits of the Jamaat's 'sacrifice.'
The Jamaat accepted its role for a while, but after the December 12, 2013 hanging of the war criminal Abdul Quader Mollah, the Jamaat was stunned by the reaction of Khaleda Zia. Her weak condemnation of the Pakistan National Assembly resolution and retaining a silence on the actual hanging queered the pitch as far as the Jamaat was concerned.
The Jamaat responded by a lukewarm participation in the December 29 "March for Democracy" programme. Consequently, the 'March' was a flop, much to BNP's embarrassment. The government made it worse by saying that Khaleda was never under house arrest but chose herself not to leave her house.
This sulking of the Jamaat couldn't have come at a worse time for Khaleda. The fate of her protest movement to prevent the elections has floundered. It remains to be seen how effective it will be to prevent people from voting and in the post election phase.
Meanwhile, reports have emerged about middle-level BNP leaders being concerned about the Party being hijacked by the Jamaat. This dissatisfaction of the second tier leadership and some rank and file has also been responsible for the abject failure of the protest movement in the past week.
Internationally too, the real face of the Jamaat has started emerging. New literature, including the 'Blood Telegram' has rekindled memories of the role of the Jamaat in the genocide in 1971. Its close association with the BNP has made Western governments re-look at the BNP's position to force a legitimate government to quit.
Thus, for Khaleda, the past few days have been one of introspection and of facing a reality check and ruing her decision of not contesting the elections.
Not only has the popularity of the BNP declined due to the violence it has unleashed in league with the Jamaat, but the sheer adverse impact on the economy and daily lives has been widely condemned. Most blame Khaleda for this.
Her alliance with the Jamaat is going through a critical phase and without the Jamaat she knows she wont be able to pressurise Sheikh Hasina, either before or after the elections.
Internationally, the Awami League is looking much better than ever before.
So where does that leave Khaleda?
With Sheikh Hasina having already won the elections, Khaleda faces the prospect of another five years in the wilderness, unless Sheikh Hasina choses to be magnanimous and agrees to holding elections for the 11th parliament earlier than in 2019.
The views expressed in the above article are that of Mr. Salim Haq. By Salim Haq
.