From: Mijanur Rahman Subject: Issues and Hartal: An Analytical Review Date: Saturday, September 25, 1999 9:49 AM Issues and Hartal: An Analytical Review By A B M S Zahur The Daily Star Despite a long preparation the opposition parties' plan for sitting-in in front of the Secretariat could not be successful. This resulted in the observance of a dramatic sixty-hour hartal apparently to stop extending transhipment facility to India. How much damage they could do to the image of the ruling party is debatable. However, they have been able to do enormous harm to the development efforts of the government. As ordinary citizens we understand that following are the specific reasons of opposition parties against allowing transhipment facility to India: * Government has already granted 'transit' facility to India and is about to allow her 'corridor' over Bangladesh without discussing it in detail in the parliament. The proposed discussion by the ruling party in the parliament is to regularise the decision already taken; and * This government is to be ousted immediately to stop operation of transit facility. On the other hand the government repeatedly claims that there has not been any decision in regard to transhipment. They have only agreed in principle to allow transhipment facility to India in consideration of financial gain and generation of employment. The government also insists that transit facility had already been extended by Zia government in 1980 and endorsed by Khaleda government in 1993 and India is already using railway and riverine route over Bangladesh. To an ordinary citizen the following questions arise and agitate the mind: a) Will these intermittent hartals compel the AL government to abdicate? (b)Will the people believe in the old Muslim League style propaganda of the Pakistani days that Awami League may sell Bangladesh to India because it is a pro-Indian political party? (c) Do the people of Bangladesh like to live in isolation? Are they not interested in developing trading activities with the neighbouring states including India? (d) As the most active member of SAARC can Bangladesh be suspicious of the attitude of the biggest member of the SAARC? (e) If we could accept that Awami League was at the forefront of the struggle for freedom how can we believe that the same party will now act in the interest of India? (f) How can we forget that it was Bangabandhu who advised India to take back its army from the soil of Bangladesh immediately on his return from Pakistani jail? In fact his greatest mistake was to show undue lenient attitude toward the anti-freedom activists. (g) Even after the attainment of freedom do we still believe in anything like the two-nation theory of Pakistan? Can we accept that Zia or Ershad were successful in converting Bangladesh people back into Pakistani thinking through tinkering of Bangladesh Constitution? h) Is it not true that Awami League sacrificed most for freedom movement? Are we now to believe that Awami League's sacrifice was only to serve Indian interest? How can we believe that the followers of BNP or JP or Jamaat are the only patriots in the country? If any political leader's conscience does not prick in occupying a government bungalow irregularly, it is difficult to accept that such a leader bothers much about high principles like patriotism or national security. i) A simple analysis of the above questions will prompt one to conclude that behind these hostile actions of the opposition parties lies the greed for power. Allowing the government to run the administration smoothly may reduce the possibility of the opposition parties to capture power. As the situation stands it appears that the possibility of defeating Awami League in the next election is not easy for the opposition parties in view of the following reasons: (a) so far no hartal could be observed on any national issue; (b) following the other party's strategy may not bring desired result; (c) using Pakistani style India-phobia slogans may not draw people's sympathy, particularly of the younger voters; (d) it is difficult to guess whether BNP and JP may work together till the next election. Will JP be satisfied with any minor positions (say, as B team of BNP) in the future government if the opposition wins? Can the Jamaat followers improve their positions through attacking the NGOs which are making the poor aware of their strength and assisting them in attaining their economic freedom? Infallibility of the fatwas is no longer accepted with the increase in the rate of literacy. e) The strength of the JCD has reduced due to the retirement of the cadre who built a good image for the party. JCD could operate more effectively (in the absence of a student organisation of JP) during the Ershad regime with direct and indirect support from BCL. (f) The activities of the Jubo Dal do not appear to be impressive. How far is BNP effective in the labour front? As far as I know BNP does not have too many sympathisers among industrial workers. (g) How about the voters in the agriculture sector? Could it wipe out its stigma of fertiliser scandal (killing of innocent peasants)? (h) How strong is BNP or JP among the business community? Apparently AL has more sympathisers than those of the combined opposition parties' there. (i) BNP's open invitation to Islam pasand parties gives an impression of a pro-fundamentalist leaning. This may reduce the number of their supporters from the liberals and minority communities. However, it is difficult to make any accurate prediction about elections because politics is not a clear game. Many factors may influence the result of election. One thing that is hurting the ordinary people is the absolute lack of trust and confidence between the two major political parties and their chosen path of confrontation. Opposition parties are seriously considering about announcing the dates and duration of another hartal at the end of the current month. May be the government will tackle the situation in a similar fashion as they did during 13-15 September, 1999 hartal. But sufferings of the ordinary citizens will increase. Worst suffers will be producers and sellers of perishable commodities such as fish and vegetables. Export sector will also be affected badly. The sufferings of the small shopkeepers also cannot be ignored. Ordinary voters are not impressed by hartals or the destructive activities or the big size of a procession. People are interested in the achievements of political parties. A political party if it commits any political blunder, must pay the price. BNP paid the price because it refused to abdicate in the face of en masse resignation by Awami League MPs. People voted Awami League because they wanted a change as BNP and JP seemed similar parties with similar objectives. As we see the government is not going to concede the demands of the opposition. Perhaps it likes to face the opposition on the streets politically. In politics there is no final word. There remains always some scope for compromise and adjustment. The ruling party must accept the reality that adoption of political strategy of sixties or seventies will not work at the end of the twentieth century. On the other hand, BNP should also give up the outdated slogans of Pakistani days. Hartal as a political weapon to embarrass the ruling party is no longer effective if used frequently without serious issue. It is harmful for all. It may vary in degrees. The major parties must learn to respect the opinions of each other. They must not underestimate each other's strength. They must be aware that in a democracy no major party can wipe out other major parties. They must have peaceful existence as far as possible. If BNP and Awami League could join hands in ousting the dictatorial regime to establish democracy there is no good reason as to why they Bangladesh the parties will realise that practice of mutual tolerance must be developed without any delay. The writer is a retired Joint Secretary.