Bangladesh at Forty Five
A. Qayyum Khan
Introduction
In the winter of 1996-97, the Center for South Asian Studies in Columbia University where Professor Rounuq Jahan wasdirector hosted a two and a half day conferencetitled "Bangladesh at Twenty Five." I attended the event.It was a great gathering of Bangladeshi scholars as well as scholars from other countries who presented research papers on various aspects of life in Bangladesh. Amartya Sen was the keynote speaker. Topics covered a wide range of subjects like constitutional law and politics, economics and development,society, history and culture, as well as other matters of contemporary interest. For me, it was an unique opportunity to listen to these speakers talk about Bangladesh something that I had never experienced in my decade and a half stay in the US. Each research paper was followed by lively questions and answers and many of the questions came from people who were also experts in their fields. In the end, I came out with a feeling of accomplishment and felt that the event provided a realistic appraisal of life in Bangladesh.
I shall disappoint you if I have created an impression that my attempt to talk about Bangladesh at forty five would be something similar to the event at Columbia twenty years ago. I simply don't have the knowledge, resources or the time to write papers that could even be comparablein rigor to the papers that were presented there. My aim is more modest.
On December 16, 1971, Bangladesh made its emergence in the 'global stage of independent states' with an empty treasury, a destroyed infrastructure and a traumatized population who had suffered inhuman tragedy at the hands of the Pakistan Army. A large part of the population was displaced by the war, many homes were destroyed,there were many families where the principal breadwinner was killed and numerous women were raped. In 1974, the country faced yet another human tragedy in the form of a famine where hundreds of thousands perished. At that time, pundits of various colors wrote extensively on why Bangladesh would not survive as an independent nation and some even characterized us as a 'bottomless basket'. These doomsday pundits were wrong. Not only have we survived, one could even argue that we have also prospered. In the past forty five years, while the Bangladesh population has doubled compared to 1971-72 levels at the same time our agricultural output has almost quadrupled. For the past decade and a half, wehave fed ourselves from our own resources and there is even a surplus for export. Today, our textile and garment industry is the envy of the world. We have made impressive strides in several industries such as leather products, frozen food, pharmaceuticals, ship breaking and shipbuilding, only to name a few. Our social progresshas also beenimpressive and on several social indicators we do better than all our south Asian neighbors. To me, one of the most satisfying scenes in the Bangladesh countryside today is to see scores of school children in clean uniforms with book bags on their backs either walking or riding bicycles to school.
Our ride to social and economic progress has not been smooth;it was quite a bumpy ride. At times, we came close to the precipice but we did not fall over. As a nation, we have a paid quite a heavy price for the progress that has been achieved. Two presidents were assassinated, national leaders were shot and killed inside the Dhaka Central Jail and today, political assassinations are reported in the news with terrifying frequency. In the past forty five years, Bangladesh was under military rule on 3 occasions and each rule lasted several years. The last time, the military took control of the government, they were practically invited by politicians to take over the reins of the country because the leading political parties could not agree on how should the caretaker government or the election commission be composed. Today, the nation is divided based on the political divide of the 2 main political parties. Professional Associations are also divided. These associationsno longer pursue the goals for which they were created, i.e., to benefit the profession.Instead, they pursue narrow political interests often driven by corrupt motives. This is true for lawyers, engineers, doctors as well as the other professions. Consequently, we have university teachers who neither look after the interests of the university nor that of its students. Today, there is not a single Bangladeshi university in the list of the world's top 1,000 universities. The leaders of student political parties are people who are in their forties and are not students. They are often associated with underworld. A Bangladeshi today cannot get any government service due to him/herfor free without greasing the palms of officials who provide the service. The same is true if one is aggrieved and seeks justice in the courts.
One does not have to be a genius to recognize that a country with 54,000 square miles that is largely a delta on the forefront of the threat of global warming with a population of 150-160 million that is soon going to reach the 200 million mark cannot continue in this path if we wish to prevent an implosion. We must find a way to be live in peace with each other governed by laws rather than living on the edge of catastrophe that is marked by violence, widespread corruption and lack of the rule of law. Our present path of progress only benefits a handful of people who receive most of the bounties of development.Our income and wealth distribution is skewed and we are rapidly heading towards a situation where 1% of the population shall end up controlling 99% of the wealth of the country.
My generation is playing their last innings in the pitch called Bangladesh. The future is in the hands of those Bangladeshis who were born after 1971. Our generation achieved independence but we also need to admit that we did not succeed in putting Bangladesh on a strong footing where the fruits of independence and progress could reach all its citizens equitably. This isbecause we were unable to create strong national institutions that wouldensure good governance. This is a task we are leaving for our children to do. In a certain sense, this paper is an effort to appraise the future leaders of Bangladesh of their taskand the challenges they will most likely face if they want a stable society for themselves and their children so that the legitimate aspirations of all Bangladeshis are fulfilled.
At the outset, I would like to make it clear that this is not a normative paper in that I do not have any prescription on what me must we do economically or agriculturally or how do we spread the light of education. Instead, I shall focus on the instruments of the modern state, i.e., Democracy, Elections, the Legislature, the Executive Branch, and the Judiciary.Whatever path the future leaders of Bangladesh choose, they shall do so by bringing reforms and changes in these instruments.Hence, in this paper I propose to describe the path we have traveled in the last 45 years insofar as the instruments of the state is concerned highlighting the errors that were made in governance and landed us in the present predicament.
We have never had a national discussion on what kind a nation state dowe want Bangladesh to be. The vote for Awami League in the first national elections of Pakistan in 1970 was for provincial autonomy to end the discrimination that the Bengalis faced in Pakistan. The vote was not for the independence of Bangladesh. We fought the liberation war because the Pakistan army launched a campaign of genocide and mass rapes on the Bengalis. Once the liberation war began as a consequence of these actions our aspiration to be free and independent became non-negotiable. Yahya postponed the national assembly session on March 1, 1971 and the liberation war began on March 26, 1971. This period was marked by a rapid changing political scenario. Consequently, while we wanted an independent Bangladesh,we did not have any national discourse on how would Bangladesh be different than Pakistan. At that time,all our aspirations seemed to have been weaved in the phrase Sonar Bangla- Golden Bengal of Rabindranath Tagore. During the liberation war I had the opportunity to talk about our dreams in independent Bangladesh with the men who fought with me. During periods of lull, there was always some kind of discussion on what would it be like to live in independent Bangladesh. Most of my comrades were rural young men and their aspirations were modest. From the description of their dreams in independent Bangladesh it was clear that they wanted human dignity, fairness and opportunities. I think the Declaration of Independence made by the Mujibnagar Government on April 10, 1971which stated: "we the elected representatives of Bangladesh, as honour bound by the mandate given to us by the people of Bangladesh whose will is supreme duly constituted ourselves into a Constituent Assembly and having held mutual consultations, and in order to ensure for the people of Bangladesh equality, human dignity and social justice declare and constitute Bangladesh to be sovereign and thereby confirm the declaration of independence already made by Bangabondhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman" captured the aspirations of my fellow fighters. The three objectives mentioned in the declaration of independence are universal for all times. They are as true today as they were in 1971. Hence, if we observe that the state practices discrimination or if it favors certain groups on the basis of race, religion, gender, sexual orientation or any other criterion, then we have to conclude that we have not been able to create a state that treats all its citizens equally. By the same token, if the state dehumanizes its citizens on some pretext or the other or if certain classes of society seem to enjoy more state privileges than others then we have to conclude that human dignity and social justice are wanting in Bangladesh.Overall, I think it would not be an unfair statement if one were to state that Bangladesh is yet to deliver on the objectives of our independence to all our citizens. As a nation, we have made errors and all of us are paying the price for these errors. These errors have manifested in various forms of ailment in the instruments of the modern state resulting in poor governance. Let's consider them in an orderly manner.
Democracy
Expressions of emancipation by the people of Bangladesh/East Bengal in Pakistan were based on democratic principles. Bengalis demanded holding free and fair election under universal adult franchise. In 1970, when Pakistan held its first national elections, the Awami League (AL) won 167 out of 169 seats allotted to East Pakistan. The ALwas created in 1948 by the Bengali leaders of the Muslim League when Liaquat Ali Khan and his cohorts stifled the voice of Bengalis within the party. Between 1948 and 1966 (the year when Six Points were announced in Lahore), the AL had four different presidents. Abdur Rashid Tarkabagish, the President of the AL in1966,was not in favor of Six Points. He opposed Sheikh Mujibur Rahman's announcement ofSix Points without party authorization.Political difference between the two was resolved in a party council in which Sheikh Mujibur Rahman was elected president of the party. TheAL did not breakup because of the differences between Mujib and Tarkabagish. Sheikh Mujibur Rahman succeeded in convincing his peers to accept the Six Points for emancipation of Bengalis because party procedures allowed debate and contest of ideas. The party practiced pluralism. This is a far cry from the last AL Council, where a resolution was adopted that the party chief's decision is the party's decision without any discussion on any of the substantive issues facing the country or the party. The Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP)too passeda similar resolution in two successive councils. This suggests that the two leading political parties are not inclined to practice democracy within the party and there is no room for debate within the party forums.Any dissent with the party chief is sufficient reason for expulsion from the party. Thus, today by design, members of major political parties can only obey the party chief's decision and they cannot express their views even when the party chief makes an error. Therefore, hopes and aspirations of the ordinary people of Bangladesh are never considered in party forums.
The Mujibnagar Government was the first government of Bangladesh. It assumed office in trying times with no advance preparation for leading the liberation war and achieving independence. During the liberation war, there was considerable divergence of views within AL and even within the cabinet. These differences were so severe that Sheikh Fazlul Haque Moni even sent an assassin to kill the Prime Minister, Tajuddin Ahmad. There was a strong challenge to Tajuddin's leadership by Sheikh Mujibur Rahman's relatives namely, Moni and Abdur Rob Seraniabat. Khandakar Mushtaque Ahmed, a cabinet member, sided with Moni and Seraniabat. There were other senior party leaders such as Mizanur Rahman Chowdhury and Professor Yousuf Ali who too sought Tajuddin Ahmad's removal. These anti-Tajuddin Ahmad elements attempted to table no-confidence motions against the prime minister in both of the AL party councils held during the liberation war. Tajuddin, as PM did not try to silence his opponents by resorting to non-democratic measures. He debated his opponents in the first council in Siliguri and obtained a strong mandate from his peers. Thus, we see that even in trying times where the tendency for many would be to deviate from democratic norms, Tajuddin Ahmad depended on pluralism and democratic practices to strengthen his own position as well as that of the provisional government. These two examples show that our fight for independence was advanced and brought to fruition through democratic practices. Pluralism served us well.
After liberation and Bangabondhu's return to Bangladesh, those who opposed Tajuddin Ahmad during the liberation war, drove a wedge between the two leaders by poisoning Mujib's ears using falsehoods. The poisoning and its accompanying falsehoods were so severe that Sheikh Mujibur Rahman never wanted to be briefed by Tajuddin Ahmad on how did the provisional government organize the liberation war and achieve the independence of Bangladesh. This rift became so difficult that Tajuddin Ahmad had to resign from the government in 1974. Slowly, AL moved away from democratic norms within the party and pluralism was not encouraged in party meetings. The fourth amendment to the constitution passed by the parliament in January 1975 extinguished multi-party democracy in Bangladesh. At the same time this amendment also took away the Supreme Court's jurisdiction over the protection and enforcement of fundamental rights.
The assassination of Bangabondhu and his family on August 15, 1975 was probably the biggest setback to constitutional rule in Bangladesh. Rationally, one would expect that in such a time of national crisis the national institutions would be sufficiently strong to follow the constitution and a successor would assume office according to the law. But that did not happen for two reasons:First, the political apparatus that took over the reins of the country after Bangabondhu's death was led by Khandakar Mushtaque Ahmed, a senior leader of AL and a cabinet member in Mujib's cabinet. Also, the politicians who were supporting Mushtaque were also from AL including some cabinet members. Mushtaque's cabinet was composed entirely of people who were from AL and some of them were even members of Mujib's cabinet. This indicates that there was considerable dissatisfaction within the AL about Mujib's rule and thesepeople did not have any compunction about Mushtaque resorting to extra-constitutional means and assassination to eliminate Sheikh Mujibur Rahman. This automatically raises the question - had the AL practiced democracy within the party after the independence of Bangladesh would Mushtaque have received as much support from AL members as he did? The second reason was that the 3 defense service chiefs pledged support for the assassins and Mushtaque without any consideration to their oath of office and constitutional obligations although these men were hand-picked by Sheikh Mujibur Rahman.
The events of August 15, triggered other events that seemed like a series of implosions of pent up frustration after the trauma of the war and famine. In order to get some semblance of legitimacy for his rule, Mushtaque played the religion and Islam card that was successfully used by the British and the Pakistanis to divide and rule. Mushtaque's rule did not even last 3 months and he was overthrown by a coup on November 3 led by Khaled Musharaf. Before leaving office, Mushtaque ordered the assassination of the four leaders of the Mujibnagar Government in Dhaka Central Jail in order to eliminate any future political challenge for himself and his extra-constitutional actions. A mutiny in Dhaka that was initiated by JSD ended Khaled Musharaf's reign on November 7 that was accompanied by a frenzy of killings in Dhaka Cantonment. Khaled Musharaf was killed by mutinous soldiers on November 7. Ziaur Rahman took control of the army after the events November 7 and he quickly distanced himself from JSD. Politics in Bangladesh had become a deadly sport.