The venue of the rallies (October 25, 2013 and January 20, 2014) addressed by Begum Khaleda Zia was the same- Suhrawardy Udyan, Dhaka - but the contrast between them could not have been greater.
On October 25, a confident Khaleda had unveiled a battle plan against Sheikh Hasina's government, marshalling the cadres of her 18 party alliance spearheaded by the Jamaat for a final onslaught. The intention was to create enough dislocation in the country to force Hasina to step down in favour of a neutral caretaker government to hold elections.
In the event, despite whatever Khalida threw at her for over two months, Hasina held firm. Elections were held under Hasina's government on January 05, 2014 which the BNP boycotted. Resultantly, the AL totally dominates the Parliament.
Faced with the prospect of another 5 years in political wilderness, it was expected that in the January 25 rally, Khaleda would reveal a new strategy to shore up the flagging party morale.
Instead, Khaleda while choosing to thank the people for what she claimed was boycotting the polls, launched her familiar tirade against Sheikh Hasina- calling her a traitor who could never be a patriot. (Hasina, incidentally returned the compliment by stating 'I doubt if she [Khaleda Zia] believes in independent Bangladesh. Her heart remains with her beloved Pakistan,' ). Khalida termed the government scandalous and illegal and accusing it of not being elected by the peoples vote but formed by the force of arms and almost dictating to Hasina to come for a discussions to arrange a free, fair election.
What was striking between the two rallies was that while the October 25 rally had been hijacked by the Jamaat, in the Jan 25 rally, none of the Jaamat leaders were seen on stage. The rally ground, unlike the October 25 rally, was not filled with banners or festoons demanding the release of Jamaat leaders convicted of war crimes. The Islami Chhatra Shibir cadres were also missing from the front of the dias.
More From This Section
Khaleda at a news conference on January 15 had announced the programme for Jan 20 in the presence of the leaders of the alliance components, including Jamaat-e-Islami. As a result, the rally was all set to be organised under the banner of the BNP-led 18-party alliance. But, according to reports, the night before, the BNP pulled the plug and decided to go it alone. This came as an unpleasant surprise to the Jamaat and other Islamist allies who had made all preparation to participate in the rally including making thousands of T-shirts, caps, banners and festoons for the rally.
Several reasons are being ascribed for the absence of the Jamaat from the rally. One, of course, is the fact that the alliance with the Jamaat was proving to be one of diminishing returns. Despite unleashing horrendous levels of violence, especially targetting the minorities, the government went through with the polls. While the violence generated a lot of criticism, there was no matching benefit for the BNP like the formation of a neutral caretaker government.
The BNP also came in for a lot of criticism internationally. Attempts to claim that the violence was unleashed by the government fell on deaf ears because such claims were contradicted by reports in all mainstream media and verified by the testimony of the victims.
Foreign countries were very critical of the violence and mounted pressure on the BNP to sever its ties with the Jamaat. The European Parliament, for example, urged the BNP to cut ties with Jamaat and Hefajat and firmly said the political parties associated with terrorist acts in Bangladesh should be banned. The US State Department spokesman on January 17, 2014 came out strongly against violence targeting the minorities.
Soon after the elections, Khaleda had said in an interview that the alliance with the Jamaat was not permanent. The absence of the Jamaat from the Jan 20 rally was the first indication that the BNP was in fact trying to move away from the Jamaat.
But is this actually so or only a ruse?
For one thing, a divorce is not easy. The BNP, unlike the Awami League, is not a cadre-based party. The BNP depends on the Jamaat for the cadres and street power. Without the Jamaat mobilization, the BNP knows it would not be able to sustain a movement to pressurize Hasina or provide the muscle power to influence fence-sitters.
Then there are the links that the Jamaat has with financial and other institutions, both within Bangladesh and abroad, like the Hefajat-e Islam that controls almost all Qawmi madrasas across the country. The BNP has access to these organizations via the Jamaat.
Not surprisingly, the BNP has clarified that the alliance with the Jamaat is intact. Even though Khaleda realises that without cutting ties with the Jamaat, the BNP risks losing support domestically and internationally, she just cannot dump the Jamaat if she has to have any hope of re-launching a movement to force Hasina into fresh elections.
Hence, while Khaleda and the BNP are likely to indulge in atmospherics showing a distancing from the Jamaat, in reality, the BNP will hold firm to the Islamist party. Khaleda, by boycotting the polls and facing another 5 years in political wilderness, has very few options left.
The views expressed in the above article are that of Mr. Salim Haq.
