& çâÌæÚUæð´ ·¤è ¥ôÚU Îð¹Ùæ ÁæÚUè ÚU¹ð´ ¥ÍæüÌ ¥ÂÙð ÜÿØ ÂÚU ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´Ð ãæÚU Ù ×æÙð´, €UØô´ç·¤ ·¤æ× ·¤ÚUÙð âð ¥æÂ·¤ô ©gðàØ ·¤è Âýæç# ãôÌè ãñ ¥õÚU ÁèßÙ ·¤æ ¹æÜèÂÙ ÎêÚU ãôÌæ ãñÐ ÖÜð ãè ÁèßÙ ×ð´ ç·¤ÌÙè Öè ·¤çÆÙæ§ü €UØô´ Ù ¥æ°, çÁ™ææâæ ¥õÚU ©ˆâæã ÕÙæ° ÚU¹ð´Ð ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´, ÜÿØ ã×ðàææ ¥æÂ·Ô¤ Âæâ ãôÌð ãñ´ çÁ‹ãð´ ÂæÙð ·Ô¤ çÜ° ÂýØæâ ¥æÂ ·¤Öè Öè àæéM¤ ·¤ÚU â·¤Ìð ãñ´Ð

So, what now?
***First of all, we need to change some laws. First, the law should debar anyone from seeking re-election to the post of Prime Minister more than twice in a lifetime (with retrospective effect). Secondly, the legal framework within which political parties and associations operate must be modified to ensure that parties strictly follow democratic norms and practices. Lastly, the public coffers should be used to finance political parties according to some formula while at the same time electoral expenses must be strictly monitored and held accountable.***
WHY is it so difficult to behave normally? Is there something congenital amongst humans (especially of the South Asian variety) that compel them to chart out a shortsighted, self-defeating and suicidal path? How else can we explain the fact that while our leaders promise us all the right and sensible things when they are out of power they promptly develop mass amnesia once in government? And then again, why on earth do we insist on falling for their lies and tricks despite a long and painful history of ineptitude, incompetence and sheer dishonesty? We often hear the pat refrain that 'every nation deserves its leaders' or words to that effect. So is it then our collective guilt at play that our leaders are no better than they are?
I have tried to find out the original source of this quotation (may well be a misquotation) in an effort to establish the context in which it was uttered or written -- without success. One thing however is quite certain in my mind. We do not deserve this kind of leadership. And the fact that
we have not been able to produce a more credible, competent and honest one does not mean there aren't any good and competent people among us. It only means that they have all been driven underground, forced to write poetry or whatever it is that good people do these days.
If one looks back over the last thirty years, and at the huge suffering, the pain, the sacrifice and the
^^^^^^^^^^^^M
loss of life that has gone into our political process one cannot but be appalled. And everyday that passes brings with it news of further insults to injury -- the last straw that still awaits a suitable back must be, that wanted criminals are competing in our municipal elections. What pray will come next? How long will it now take for a 'Wanted Mayor' or even a similar Minister. Mastanistan, here I come!
There is little point in beating around the bush. At any rate whatever bush we have had is dwindling fast so that it is best that we try and get out of this time-honoured Bengali trait of excessive prevarication and circumlocution. It is clear as daylight that a principal cause,
perhaps even the most important cause, of our moribund political leadership has to do with the problem of succession. We have inherited our two top leaders -- they were not really democratically elected leaders in the accepted sense of the word. They did not rise through the ranks, putting in hard labour and competing against rivals. Leadership was handed to them on a golden platter, a platter that
seemed rich, tempting and irresistible. They went straight to the top of their respective party leadership painlessly, effortlessly, and simply because of their family ties -- riding on a wave of popular sympathy following the assassination of Bangabandhu and President Zia. Such things can only happen in South Asia, where the mind-set remains feudal and where 'bloodties' are deemed to be a legitimate source of power. Thus, we now have two Royal Houses, each with its own trappings (courtiers, sycophants, followers-on, court-jesters, knights, hatchet-men and kitchen-cabinets). The primary concern of each House is to ensure succession along the bloodline and to retain continuity of
rule (their rule!). This has led to the over-use of debased symbols and derelict ideologies in an effort to wring out the few last drops of utility that may still exist there. In the meantime, there are more immediate concerns -- of political survival for one House and credibility for the other. I believe that a socio-political analysis of our current political quagmire must necessarily begin from the above premise -- i.e. the
emergence of the Royal Houses of Bengal. If this were not true then what reason could there possibly be for either of the leaders to hang on to their positions despite setback after setback and debacle after debacle. Shouldn't Sheikh Hasina now resign after leading her great party into unprecedented failure in the last elections? Shouldn't there now be a new leadership who can start afresh and perhaps even produce some new ideas and strategies? By the same token, shouldn't the Prime Minister have decided to call it a day a long time ago to allow new blood into the upper echelons of her party? 'She's won a great victory', I hear you say. But wasn't that simply because the AL lost? Isn't it also
clear that while she reigns, she doesn't seem to rule? We have seen the first 100 days pass off quietly. I can bet you that many hundred days will pass off as well -- all equally quietly.
What next?
If it were Pakistan, the prognosis would be quite straightforward. Another strong man would take over, say the right things, remain publicly clean, promise a return to
democracy 'as soon as possible, and definitely within 90 days', stay around for a few years, hold a referendum, float a political party … why am I saying all this anyway -- just ask Poet H.M. Ershad, he has the original blue-print.
Bangladesh is not Pakistan (thank God). We have held successful, 'free and fair' elections thrice, have institutionalised the Caretaker Government, and most importantly, evolved a fundamental change in our mindset: no matter what our politics, we will not accept the Army back into power, ever again (Amen). We therefore have to figure out some other way of getting out of the chaos, anarchy and misrule. So, what now?
At this stage, I am almost tempted to cop out using the time-honoured practice of the academic: 'This is beyond the scope of my paper' or 'Space in this column does not allow me to dwell at length on this subject, as I have already exhausted 963 words out of my allotted 1000', etc.
First of all, we need to change some laws. First, the law should debar anyone from seeking reelection to the post of Prime Minister more than twice in a lifetime (with retrospective effect). Secondly, the legal framework within which political parties and associations operate must be modified to ensure that parties strictly follow democratic norms and practices. Lastly, the public coffers should be used to finance political parties according to some formula (I remember Dr. Kamal Hussain talking about this at length some years ago -- I am sure the mechanisms will not be difficult to establish), while at the same time electoral expenses must be strictly monitored and held accountable. Of course these things will not happen automatically. The time has come for our Civil Society to close rank, forget narrow political differences (or agree to disagree) and exert all the pressure under our collective control to effect these changes. Here I am in Islamabad, on a pleasant Sunday, not far from the Church that was bombed recently -- and using the occasion to sermonise at a safe distance! Actually, I simply had to get this thing out of my system. Thanks for your attention.
K.A.S. Murshid, an economist, is Research Director, BIDS