FROM PAGE 16

system and a few helpless NGOs being sent around the country to persuade people to vote ‘yes’ for reforms,” he said.

He said the interim government wants to oblige the July uprising leaders and thus a cosmetic arrangement has been created.

“But the objective reality is that until you have a government in office for the next five years, capable of carrying out reforms, and until you can evaluate the quality and sincerity of their implementation, reforms do not truly take place.”

Prof Sobhan said political settlement requires the main players coming to an understanding over the rules of the game, identifying the principal players and also those who can disrupt it and then finding ways to re-accommodate them within the political system.

“Unfortunately, at the moment, you have blackwashed -- or whitewashed -- one of the players completely out of the game,” Prof Sobhan said, referring to the banning of Awami League’s activities.

Mahfuj Alam, leader of the July uprising and former adviser to the interim government, said he was in favour of reconciling with the Awami League and holding accountable the ones responsible for massive crimes.

The core objective of the anti-discrimination movement was transforming the entire state system, Mahfuj said, but added that the vision could not be fully communicated to the audience supporting the uprising, particularly the students.

The major resistance to reforms came from the civil-military bureaucracy, he said, adding that the reform efforts in these areas “failed disastrously”.

Mahfuj said building consensus among political parties proved to be a major challenge.

Although there was ideological unity during the uprising, a subsequent shift toward one side of the political spectrum created a trust deficit among stakeholders, he said, adding that part of the civil society became critical of the government because of violent activities.

Naomi Hossain, a professor of Development Studies at SOAS University of London, said she expected the next government to recognise political violence as a critical problem for Bangladesh.

“That means removing the impunity of incumbent power to commit violence and reducing the incentives for violence to be part of political competition. Until that changes, I don’t see how we can truly consolidate democracy or move forward.”

In an earlier session, Prof Ali Riaz, special assistant to the chief adviser, said civil society had “completely failed” after the uprising and would “fail another round” when the next opportunity arises.

He said it adopted a self-declared apolitical posture that ultimately aligned it with partisan interests.

Prof Riaz said the interim government lacked the political command to control the state apparatus, allowing the bureaucracy to regain dominance, while the “ancient regime” remained embedded in state structures.

“You are asking them [the bureacracy] to support you while telling them their authority will be reduced. Why would they?”

Shaheen Anam, executive director of Manusher Jonno Foundation, rejected Prof Riaz’s characterisation of civil society and said their actions since July were political by nature.

“All the protests, all the statements that we have made so far are all political,” Shaheen said, adding that civil society took positions against discrimination because it believed the interim government had a mandate to protect inclusivity.

Mirza M Hasan, a senior research fellow at BIGD, said the post-uprising period should be read as what Antonio Gramsci called a “time of monsters”, when the old order is dying but the new has not yet been born.

Sayeed Ferdous, a professor at Jahangirnagar University, said student leaders who initially appeared as “superheroes” or “mavericks” were quickly absorbed into the system.

“In their minds, they too became small autocrats,” he said, adding that marginalised groups remained among the worst affected despite promises of ending discrimination.

Prof Samina Luthfa of Dhaka University said the political transition that followed was shaped largely by elite negotiations rather than grassroots control.

She said student leaders who had mobilised people on the streets gradually moved closer to formal power, weakening ties with supporters.

The rapid move to form a political party, she added, left little space for internal debate on ideology, goals and organisation, she added.