& 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

Bangladesh politics at cross roads

KAZI ANWARuL MASuD
IT is getting increasingly difficult to describe accurately the depth of degeneration Bangladesh society is fast sinking into. While on television screen we watched the French and the Dutch rebelling against the government by casting no-vote on the proposed European Constitution and the governments in both the countries (Jacque Chirac sacked his Prime Minister) acknowledging the primacy of their citizens; in Bangladesh one is confronted with almost daily scenes of the police and the student cadre of a particular political party indiscriminately clubbing down the voice of opposition in the educational institutions.
Alongside the dehumanisation of student politics, Bangladeshis' sensibilities were assaulted by the sordid details of a family drama enacted by a prominent politician of the country, allegedly on account of threats to cut the fragile thread holding the sword of Damocles hanging over his head.
The current state of asphyxiation of dissent through threats of the use and the actual use of violence to mute any form of dissent is unprecedented. It might not be too much to suggest that if we are not careful that we will end up on the path of eventual rejection of liberal and democratic values and espousal of totalitarianism.
Political scientists argue that totalitarianism is not the antithesis of democracy, but is one of its extreme possibilities. This form results from the degeneration of democracy through its failure to resolve its crises of legitimacy. They further argue that totalitarianism is reflected through its total identification of political functions and powers that in a democratic system are conceptually thought to be distinct.
In the Kantian description, democracy is reduced to despotism where law collapses and decisions made are partial devoid of universal reason which should be the prime justification of law. Besides, despotism allows the majority to legislate
to its particular advantage, thus disregarding the will of the people which might have changed since the legislators were elected by the people.
The French and the Dutch referenda have proved this point, among others, that the legislators once
decision making rule.
But the tyranny of the majority can be avoided through "coherent majoritarianism" which requires not simply the most votes but the most votes produced by the best arguments. "The means by which a majority comes to be a majority,"
where violence will become unnecessary because absolute power will reign, remains to be seen.
But then the Actonian precept of absolute power corrupting absolutely would invariably set in, compounding the existential corruption in Bangladesh which by any stan-
possibility of fomenting religious extremism and suffering from widespread violation of human rights.
In these days of hawk-eyed scrutiny of domestic affairs of countries harbouring religious fanatics, and western impatience with human rights violations, unless a country is
elected may not necessarily continue to reflect the will of the people. Though unlike France, in Holland it remains to be seen if the referendum results, albeit on an issue intrinsic to yet not totally identifiable with domestic politics, would result in any change in government; its ripple effect has already been seen in the UK where the British government have indefinitely postponed holding the proposed referendum on the European Constitution.
The essential point laboured at citing the European referenda is to emphasise the primacy of the will of the people in the determination of their fate. Both in France and in Holland the people appear to have rebuked their governments for surging ahead with the concept of a "corporate Europe" without consulting them. This process of continuous consultations almost perfected in Switzerland is the essence of democratic process.
German philosopher Jurgen Habermas stresses that the state's raison d'etre lies primarily "in the guarantee of an inclusive process of opinion-and-will-formation in which free and equal citizens reach an understanding on which goals and norms lie in the equal interest of all." Since political consultations with the citizens at all stages, though ideal, may not be practicable, one of the bad outcomes of deliberative democracy can be majoritarian
writes John Dewy "is the important thing: antecedent debates, the
modification of views to meet the opinion of the minority ... The essential need in other words, is the improvement in the methods and the conditions of debate, discussion and persuasion."
Essentially unfettered debates and discussions among political adversaries have to be internalised in the political process. If the way to such discussion and debate is barred by a political adversary who happens to be in power at any given moment, then violence is bound to follow. Since the state holds all legitimate means of violence, it can employ state agents to subdue their political adversaries.
But in an age of police brutality and humanitarian intervention, in an age of abridged sovereignty where governments are required to treat fairly their citizens and foreigners alike, the indiscriminate use of state agents to perpetrate violent acts may not be desirable.
In such cases, governments tend to use their political cadres (supported by state agents) to conduct violent acts against their political adversaries. At the moment this appears to be the case in Bangladesh. Whether perpetuation of violence will lead to a situation where opposition will be totally silenced, resulting in a situation
dard --national or international -- is endemic and has consumed all sectors of public life.
Morality apart, the sheer volume of corruption is regressing GDP growth and increasing the already unconscionable widening gap between the rich and the poor. Almost half of the total population of Bangladesh is believed to be living below the poverty line and the number of ultra-poor is increasing at an alarming rate. It is generally thought that the ultra-poor, unable to articulate their grievances and enveloped by utter hopelessness, can be easily manipulated and their votes easily purchased during elections. But the continuing inability of the authorities to deliver political goods to the people in the form of education, health, food, employment and other essential ingredients of life, as opposed to conspicuous consumption by a section of people living off ill-gotten wealth, may enliven the ultra-poor to stage a cold war against the oppressive rulers.
Devotion to God and poverty, seen by George Bernard Shaw as the greatest of evils and the worst of crimes, being closely inter-linked, there remains a distinct possibility of protest by the ultra-poor taking religious cover. Bangladesh is reportedly on the watch list of the West as a country pregnant with the
serving the vital interests relating to the war on terror, prudence demands that the government in countries suffering from internal political discord should try to be accommodative of views expressed by "identity politics" -- defined as fragmentation of political community into religious, ethnic, racial, and ideological groups -- instead of meeting differing views with an iron-fisted response.
Western countries and international financial institutions, so essential for the economic development of Bangladesh, have on many occasions been highly critical of the way the country is being governed. Governmental authorities have been accused of political interference, impeding the process of sound economic decisions, widespread corruption, leaving its devilish imprint on the politico-socioeconomic personality of the country, money and muscle power, distorting the true reflection of the will of the people in the elections, and extrajudicial killings by state agents, raising disturbing ethical and legal questions.
It has been said that patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel. Yet wars have been fought and people have been worshipped in the name of patriotism. However since decolonisation has become a matter of the past and the process of
globalisation continues to blur national identities, patriotism has gained a different meaning for people belonging to a defined geographical area known as a state.
To nurture patriotism it is necessary to make citizens proud of their country. Pride comes from achievement. It is therefore necessary that the political leaders of a country provide the people with opportunities and environment enabling them to achieve such feats of which they can be proud of. After all being branded as the most corrupt country in the world for years together can hardly make Bangladeshis to be proud of their country.
Equally, being one of the poorest and ill governed countries can scarcely imbibe a sense of patriotism among the people. If a statesman is distinguished from a politician as being one who thinks of the next generation instead of the next election, then political leaders owe to the present and the future generation of Bangladeshis the responsibility to provide the country with exemplary leadership of which people can be genuinely proud.
But then the responsibility ultimately devolves upon the people to choose their representatives judiciously. If one were to go through the history of Bangladesh one would find that since 1947, the people of Bangladesh always rose to the occasion and voted correctly, only to be failed by their leaders time and again.
In 1952, 1954, 1962, 1969, 1971, and thereafter Bangladeshis chose well. One hopes, given the present impasse, that Bangladeshis would be given another opportunity, sooner rather than later, to choose their leaders after appropriate administrative and electoral changes have been made so that a truly free and fair election can be held.
Kazi Anwarul Masud is a former Secretary and Ambassador.