#Title

Can a Third Way politics transform Bangladesh?
In the 1990s, former British Prime Minister Tony Blair and US President Bill Clinton introduced a bold new approach that blended centre-left and centre-right ideologies to redefine modern politics. Blair’s Third Way and Clinton’s New Democrat policies combined market-based economics with social justice aspirations. This approach, often described as “modernised social democracy” or “radical-centrist politics,” was aimed at reforming traditional socialist principles by incorporating aspects of free market capitalism. Both Blair and Clinton emphasised that the rigid divisions between the left and the right were no longer tenable for winning elections and addressing the rapidly changing global order. Their proposals, focused on democratising institutions, promoting social equality and building justice-based societies, were instrumental in helping both Blair and Clinton secure electoral victories.
Blair’s government, for instance, significantly boosted public spending on free healthcare and education, introduced the minimum wage, and expanded rights of marginalised groups. Similarly, the Clinton administration implemented a $500 per child tax credit, expanded state funding to provide coverage for uninsured children in low-earning households, raised the minimum wage, and secured job protection for workers needing medical or family leave.
In Bangladesh, fusion of ideologies remains elusive as the country’s political scene reels on the edge of chaos, plagued by a ruthless game of power where ordinary people’s interests are often sacrificed. Instead of fostering a balanced and inclusive political environment, what has emerged is a form of laissez-faire politics, where political parties prioritise actions that serve their own and corporate interests. This disastrous and anti-democratic approach has led to a situation where the very citizens for whom politics should be organised are increasingly marginalised.
The July uprising is a direct consequence of the long-standing ideological vacuum that has plagued the country since the Liberation War. Despite various political factions labelling themselves differently, they have largely failed to exhibit a coherent ideology that aligns with their manifestos or serves broader public interests. This situation is unlikely to change unless Bangladesh’s political landscape rejects neoliberal practices such as unchecked privatising and subcontracting, mimicking Western-centric economic models without local adaptation, failing to ensure transparency and accountability in governance, and accumulating high-interest foreign loans for corrupt purposes.
Standing on the brink of political turmoil, Bangladesh needs a fresh Third Way. This approach should emphasise secularism, freedom of speech, anti-nepotism, non-violence, and a commitment to equal rights for all citizens regardless of gender or identity, alongside justice and equity to safeguard the democratic and voting rights. It should offer both existing and new political parties as well as the secular collectives the chance to present viable and visible alternatives to the existing political setup. Any party that transparently adopts these people-centric ideas and acknowledges past mistakes is likely to gain a stronger foothold in the evolving political landscape. However, achieving this reset is challenging, especially given the low level of public trust in politicians in Bangladesh. Despite these difficulties, a reset is crucial.
To bring about this change, political parties must reform their structures, suspend corrupt figures, and include honest and grassroots individuals in politics. What other interesting and visible agendas can they offer? For example, the recent formation of the Ganatantrik Odhikar Committee (Committee for Democratic Rights), led by Dhaka University Emeritus Professor Serajul Islam Choudhury, to monitor the workings of the interim government is a notable initiative. This approach could be adopted by any political party willing to offer constructive feedback to the interim government. A formal shadow government put forward by the opposition parties in the UK, for instance, scrutinises the actions and workings of the government in power and suggests alternative policies for their considerations. Establishing such initiatives in Bangladesh would enable the public to evaluate political party proposals to the interim government and their merit.
More importantly, imagine the potential if Bangladesh’s secular and left-leaning democratic parties were to unite, thus forming a powerful coalition to bring people-focused politics to the forefront of the national agenda. This approach could bridge the existing gap between centre-left and centre-right ideologies, and even bring together secular and religious groups through shared objectives like social welfare, fighting corruption, and resisting discrimination and communal violence. The collective could also focus on marginalised groups such as rural citizens, farmers, and labourers, who are often excluded from urban political discourse but capable of generating significant grassroots mobilisation.
To gain momentum, this new collective must rethink its approach to public engagement, seizing this critical moment to lead a fresh and compelling political vision. If Bangladesh’s secular and democratic parties don’t capture this moment to unite and drive a new agenda, it is unclear when they will have another opportunity. Should they choose to act, their efforts must be sincere. Any viable Third Way political idea must resonate with ordinary citizens and galvanise public support in the next democratic election.
Look no further than India’s Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) for a real-world success case, where a grassroots movement turned the political establishment on its own right. AAP emerged from the anti-corruption movement in India in 2011. The party positioned itself as an alternative to the traditional political establishment by focusing on transparency, anti-corruption measures and grassroots engagement. Despite initial scepticism, AAP gained significant traction in Delhi, eventually securing a landslide victory in the 2015 Legislative Assembly election. AAP’s earlier success was rooted in its ability to articulate a clear political objective that resonated with the public, and its effort to challenge the status quo. AAP’s rise demonstrated that a new political force could emerge and disrupt the existing power dynamics if the new offerings align with the rightful desires of the ordinary people.
As Bangladesh faces its own political reckoning, the lessons from AAP’s meteoric rise show the way for a new era of genuine, people-driven change in the country. But the greatest challenge for a new party or collective in Bangladesh would be the demonstration of their non-violent and non-threatening approach, upholding of secular ideals, and maintenance of an unwavering commitment to the democratic rights of all citizens, including minorities and those with opposing views. If they can remain steadfast to these commitments, any collective or party emerging as a Third Way could have a lasting impact on Bangladeshi politics. Even if it comes through an existing political party revitalising itself, it would still be significant.
Standing on the brink of political turmoil, Bangladesh needs a fresh Third Way. This approach should emphasise secularism, freedom of speech, anti-nepotism, non-violence, and a commitment to equal rights for all citizens regardless of gender or identity, alongside justice and equity to safeguard the democratic and voting rights.