***An EV parliamentary delegation rightly diagnosed the prevailing political ailment in Bangladesh. It noted that what concerns our leaders — the leaders of the two major parties — is their lust for power. Nothing else -- the welfare of the people, poverty eradication, empowerment of women, boosting investment, economic development, strengthening the foundation of democracy and other important national issues — concerns them. 1 his is, indeed, a bad omen for Bangladesh. And this is the main reason behind the collision course chosen by Sheikh Hasina and Begum Khaleda Zia as the next general election, scheduled for 2001, fast approaches.***

I I MOCRACY Is a kingless Ireglme infested by many -1--X kings who are sometimes more exclusive, tyrannical and destructive than one, If he be a tyrant." Italian dictator Benltto Mussolini, who acquired notoriety for his policy of Fascism, said this by way of expressing his derision towards democratic dispensation. All autocrats, whether in Bangladesh or elsewhere in the world, past or present, were equally contemptuous of democratic polity. But democracy is not what these dictators meant or tried to hammer on In their bld to cling to power. Democracy. in essence. Is accommodation and tolerance of and respect for each other's viewpoints. Democracy, called unity in diversity. Is the rule of the majority. But in a democracy the minority voice Is also equally heard and avenues exist for their proper ventilation. Regular interaction and Interchanges between the majority and the minority opinions ensure accountability and transparency from which the electorates form their own mindset as to which side is wrong and which side is right. In a democracy the party or parties in power and those in opposition share broad consensus on major national Issues. Only their approaches and pollcw options to those Issues are different. Both the sides strongly vouchsafe welfare of the people and vow to work for promotion of greater Interest of the country.

People In a democracy closely observe the performances of two sides which are equally responsible and accountable to them and give their verdict accordingly when the time for the hustings come. In a democracy when the occasion demands, the ruling party and the opposition share the same platform and unitedly work for salvaging the nation to reassure the people of their concern for their (people) betterment and to extricate them from all possible pitfalls. Democracy is thus reconciliation rather than confrontation. If the minority

voice Is stifled or muzzled by the majority, and if the opposition, in its turn, behaves In an obdurate manner and instead of extending co-operation stands as stumbling block al every step of governance. It automatically gives rise to a situation identical to Mussolini's definition of democracy. It then turns into sham democracy. Democracy then largely becomes only a facade.

The recent Incident at Kalaroa where the movement of the motorcade of the Leader of the Op|x>slllon was blocked on the pretext of security for the Prime Minister, who was also scheduled to visit the area, and the consequent hullabaloo In political arena ever since are not, in any way. reflective of true democratic spirit. 'Fite law enforcers with the help of paramilitary forces put up a three-hour road blockade and the leader of tlle opposition along with her followers and members of the public, who had nothing to do with politics, remained stranded for hours together at a point on Jessore-Satkhlra road. She was not allowed to visit the flood-affected areas and sympathise with the afflicted people.

Front the southern tip to the northern region a vast area was, and still Is, under floodwater in western Bangladesh. It has been a surprise flood and is the worst in three decades. The unprecedented cataclysmic deluge was caused by the onrush of waters from across the border. Nearly three million people have so far been affected and rendered homeless. Their condition is simply abysmal. During such a calamitous situation there should not have been any divide on party lines. Forgetting party differences both the ruling party and the opposition should have stood by the side of the stricken people to give (hem encouragement as well as succour. But our leaders on both sides of the fence failed to rise to the occasion and delved In polemics and confrontational politics, as they are wont to, much to the dismay and chagrin of the saner democracy-loving elements.

In a democracy it should have

been the other way round. In UK Winston Churchill and Clement Attic were leading the Conservatives and the Labour Party respectively in the late 1940s and early 1950s. Inside the House of Commons they would not spare each other and harangued in the strongest the worst possible follies and foibles of the opposing side. But outside the House of Commons they had the best of relations and were often found to be sipping coffee and cutting jokes across the same table in the Parliament cafeteria. To them they have best performed the role entrusted to them by their electorates. But in their personal life they behaved like close friends. Can we imagine such a situation In Bangladesh with Sheikh Hasina and Khaleda Zia sharing the same table and chatting on personal matters like good friends (the Prime Minister in her recent radio Phone-In Programme said all women In Bangladesh are her friends. Is the leader of the opposition included)? Personal relations between the two leaders are reported to be so bitter that to avoid each other the opposition has resorted to prolonged Ixiycott of Parliament (It Is at least one of the reasons). They do not face each other In official parties and private gatherings and do not talk

to each other even over telephone. They meet seldom and even if they meet they do not talk to each other. In short, they are not on talking terms. These cannot in any way be good signs for democracy to flourish in Bangladesh.

A few years back a number of school children were brutally massacred in Britain. The entire nation was shocked and a pall of gloom cast its shadow every where. The then Prime Minister John Major and the then leader of the opposition Tony Blair together travelled to the school where the killings took place and Jointly stood on the rostrum to reassure the mourning nation that they are one and united in the condemnation of the dastardly incident. In neighbouring India a few months ago a large number of pilgrims were gunned down by the fundamentalist Insurgents In Delhi administered Kashmir. The shock from these indiscriminate killings ricocheted and reverberated throughout the length and breadth of India. Prime Minister Atal Beharl Vajpayee and the Leader of the Opposition, Congress president Sonia Gandhi visited the place of occurrence on board the same plane. But on her return Sonia did not hesitate to blast the government for Its failure to provide adequate security to the pilgrims. When Naraslmha Rao was the Prime Minister he had sent a number of Important delegations abroad with the leader of die opposition Atal Behari Vajpayee as their head to represent India. But In Bangladesh the leader of the opposition was never given such an honour, and she in her turn resorts to castigating the government before foreign envoys and dignitaries.

In Bangladesh the older generation of leaders despite their political differences used to maintain excellent interpersonal relations. The then Prime Minister Sheikh Mujibur Rahman was extremely respectful towards Moulana Abdul Hamid Khan Bhasani despite the fact that the latter was bitterly critical of the way the former was ruling the country. Only months before his assassination Sheikh Mujlb went to Moulana Bhasani's house at Santosh, Tangall responding to latter's Invitation to Inaugurate the nationalised Moulana Mohammed Ali College set up by him (the Moulana).

But the new generation of leaders in Bangladesh has forsaken that tradition. They are now apt in treating their political

opponents as personal enemies. Tills Is why there arc so many political killings in Bangladesh. Instead of putting up road blockade to stop the leader of Jie opposition. the Prime Minister should have invited her to together visit the flood-stricken areas. Tl^ should liave been the true spirit of democracy and this was the expectation of the people. But unfortunately the two leaders are so much scared of each olher that they had publicly accused each other for hatching conspiracies for their extermination. This demonstrates how intolerant they have become of each other.

Security agencies have recently become over Jealous for what they tenn as protecting the Prime Minister. Their overkill in this respect Is vexing the general people. They block the roads much before the Prime Minister is to pass through them causing long traffic Jams. They forget that this way they’ are. in fact, isolating the iTime Minister who is a public leader and making her a prisoner of her own security system. The Prime Ministers security must, of course, get priority. But at the same time the point of public conve-nlence/inconvenlence should also be kept in mind.

An EU parliamentary delegation rightly diagnosed the prevailing political ailment in Bangladesh. It noted that what concern , our leaders — the leaders of the two major parties — is their lust for power. Nothing else - the welfare of the people, poverty eradication, empowerment of women, boosting investment, economic development, strengthening the foundation of democracy and olher important national Issues -- concerns them. This is. indeed, a bad omen for Bangladesh. And this is the main reason behind the collision course chosen by Sheikh Hasina and Begum Khaleda Zia as the next general election, scheduled for 2001. fast approaches. This has made observers, both inside and outside the country, appre-henslve of the sustainability of our fledgling democracy.