& 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

What now?

Brig Gen Shahedul Anam Khan ndc, psc (Retd)
AT least the AL and BNP proposals have helped to reduce the prospect of a violent situation, for the time being at least, all revolving round the character of the interim political arrangement. How much this will help to address the current political flux and attendant uncertainty is another matter given that neither proposal has found acceptance of the opposite camp.
Although the two proposals do not contain anything new, and are restatements of the long held positions of the two parties, articulated at a time when people were bracing for the worst, these have come as great relief. The optimists see the recent development as something that provides an opportunity to the two parties to engage in a dialogue, the initial makings of which we have already witnessed.
The PM's offer reasserts the party's stand regarding adherence to the constitutional provisions, particularly the 15"' Amendment. But the idea of an all party government has been rejected by the BNP as being unclear and one that does not provide a level playing field for all contestants. It feels that the PM's formula is designed to fit her plans to manipulate the next parliamentary elections.
BNP's offer on the other hand only reaffirms the fact that it is still rooted to the idea of a non-party caretaker government as an interim arrangement to oversee the conduct of the next parliamentary elections.
The two parties are therefore as far apart as they have been since the beginning of the imbroglio. Given that reality, one wonders whether there is scope for a resolution of the stand-off that has the potential of dangerous outcome should a solution not be found quickly. However, I am inclined to feel, notwithstanding the out-of-hand dismissal of the proposals by the respective parties, that the compulsions on the two parties to resolve the issue are enormous, the most important of which is the consequences of the failure to come to a mutually acceptable arrangement. Are there any other options open to the two parties?
For the AL it can go head with the election regardless of whether the BNP participates. This option, apart from validating the gossip that it is indeed AL strategy to keep BNP out of election, one finds no political dividend that the AL will gain from it.
Should the AL take recourse to this choice, it will be because the party feels that it would be able to effectively handle any post-election fallout. Obviously it credits the BNP with very little capability to create the level of disturbance and chaos that would destabilise the situation and bring down the government. Well, the AL may well be able to stem the BNP's political onslaught but it cannot be lost upon the party that such an election will neither have national nor international recognition.
And if for some reason there is no election within the stipulated time, then the PM can continue in office "until his successor has entered upon office."
By holding a single party election, or holding on to the office of the PM till a new prime minister is elected, the AL will not be violating the constitution. But it will only stand discredited, having rooted its stance on the 15th Amendment, which, according to at least one constitutional expert, is the worst of all the amendments. And the process of the amendment belies an ulterior motive, the judicial caveats notwithstanding.
For the BNP it can stick to its position and see an election without them, with the sticking points, Sheikh Hasina being the head of 'interim' government, and the parliament remainingin vogue during election, unaddressed. The outcome of these options is only too obvious - a national disorder followed by violence and uncertainty. It cannot be lost on the two parties that whatever merit they may think their respective positions have, and the Constitution or not, they will have to share the responsibility for bringing the country to such a pass. Can the country afford further chaos, and can the parties afford to be party to the situation that would ensue should no amicable solution be forthcoming soon?
The two proposals should not be seen as merely proposals, but as opportunity to engage in dialogue to avert chaos, and do so without appearing to be giving grounds to the opposition, or losing face, something that our politicians are so sensitive about.
People's patience is running out and despondency may reach a high pitch with unpredictable consequences, particularly when they are made captives of the caprices of the two parties.
The writer is Editor, Oped and Defence & Strategic Affairs, The Daily Star.