Its a shame that Khaleda's politics is now tailored at Mujahid's shop
Innovation Line
==============================
Note: This is a freelance column, published mainly in different internet based forums. This column is open for contribution by the members of new generation, sometimes referred to as Gen 71. If you identify yourself as someone from that age-group and want to contribute to this column, please feel free to contact. Thanks to the group moderator for publishing the article as Creative Commons contents.
By Farhad Mazhar
1
MAKING a new order for Bangladesh implies remaking Bangladesh politically. If we decide to continue with a state which is thoroughly undemocratic, dictatorial and dangerous for our life, liberty and prosperity, we are destined to be ruined. So, simple common sense can guide us to realise that we can neither continue with the present or nor could we go back to the order that was prevailing before January 11, 2007. For the same reason we cannot subscribe to the idea of 'constitutional continuity'; it implies that all we need now is an election with the participation of all political parties for a parliament to pass a bill in order to retroactively provide constitutional legitimacy to the present unconstitutional government, including all their acts and decisions that are far beyond their jurisdiction. To make a new order, we must start contemplating a new but authentic democratic state with a new democratic constitution. Running the wheels backward will take us nowhere. Whether we are able to change the course of politics is not the point now. In the context of the present reality, the idea must arrive first, before we can start thinking about the strategy and tactics to realise the idea.
An election in order to indemnify the present regime and to re-elect corrupt politicians is not on the people's agenda. Popular sovereignty is the major concern and people want change; instead of partisan rule of anti-people and anti-democratic elite political parties, they want popular and democratic power with corresponding institutions to exercise the right to participate in the decisions of the state at all levels. People are against the present regime because it is against politics in general and destroying the very fabric of the polity. But people are also against the political parties because they are still refusing to act politically and still dreaming to act as economic syndicates to plunder Bangladesh as soon as they come to power through election; they may end up bringing anarchy and violence rather than resolving genuine political difference that exists among people.
Authentic political transformation is not only necessary to enjoy the sovereignty as a member of the political community and liberty as citizens, but the major precondition to prosper in a highly competitive global economy. To act responsibly with dignity in the regional and global affairs, Bangladesh must be constituted as a new state based on popular will and determination. An authentic political transformation of Bangladesh is in the interest of the global community as well, if they are indeed concerned about security, anarchy, violence and the failure in governance. But they cannot deny the right to resolve political problem by the people themselves, which they have already done by installing and supporting a regime that has no legitimacy or capacity to resolve the crisis.
People of Bangladesh are aware that 'sovereignty' of the states in the era of globalisation is undergoing radical transformation. No one in the global community is an island or independent of others. Nevertheless, the concern is whether we should submit ourselves to the logic of the world market and dictates of other stronger states or determine our interests by ourselves. We need a position in the international division of labour that ensures our economic prosperity and security and safeguards our natural, biological, social and knowledge resources. We must address threatening challenges of food shortages, precarious situation of health and nutrition, environmental and ecological destruction and unequal distribution of wealth and resources.
People are not against election, they are against the farce that might take place to provide legitimacy to the present regime. This is the crucial site of the political contention. If Bangladesh intends to move forward the only meaningful option is to find ways to constitute Bangladesh to effectively deal with popular concerns: protection of life, livelihood and dignity. The present state is already a threat to the life and livelihood of the people. Global and regional realities are reinforcing this threat.
How could we go about to constitute popular sovereignty, is a question that must be addressed, but for the sake of brevity, we will dwell mainly on the idea of an authentic republic. The sovereign will of the people may be mobilised in the streets through demonstrations and various forms of resistance against undemocratic and unconstitutional forces by the people; they are constantly fighting against fascists, communal and anti-people elements, anti-democratic classes, forces and tendencies. History teaches us that this is the path people generally take. This is the brewing period, when all other liberal spaces are exhausted and the culmination usually takes form of popular insurgency. Popular will and determinations are formed through public meetings, workshops, and seminar or even in popular discussions known as adda. Popular media plays very important role in this regard. Election may be one of the tools to constitute democratic polity; for example, if people succeed in their endeavour to overthrow the undemocratic order, they convene a constituent assembly elected by the people. The authentic polity usually emerges through radical break from the existing undemocratic order.
Election is not an abstract game. Election to constitute a new order, i.e. constituting an authentic republic, after the victory of the people is not the same as elections as we see in an actually existing state. Qualitatively and politically they are different types. The present state of Bangladesh was constituted by people who were elected to the Pakistan constituent assembly. The founding document of Bangladesh is known as 'The proclamation of independence', declared in Mujibnagar on April 10, 1971. It says: 'Whereas free elections were held in Bangladesh from 7th December 1970 to 17th January 1971, to elect representatives for the purpose of framing a Constitution ....we the elected representatives of the people of Bangladesh, as honour bound by the mandate given to us by the people of Bangladesh whose will is supreme duly constituted ourselves into a Constituent Assembly.' Politicians who were elected in 1970 under the constitution of Pakistan, as Pakistanis, are self-declaring themselves as the member of the Constituent Assembly of Bangladesh, sitting in India and at a time when liberation war is only beginning. The people of Bangladesh have been deprived to constitute themselves through their own representative in the liberated Bangladesh. This is the 'original sin' of the founding act of Bangladesh. Time has arrived again providing opportunity to correct the course of history.
Election of the constituent assembly after the victory of the people is to 'constitute' the state; its primary task is to draft a constitution. In the democratic state with a democratic constitution, election is meant to exercise democracy that already exists in the form of the democratic state. Parliamentary or local government election to elect the people's representative to take decisions at various levels and organs of the state is not the founding act of democracy as the election of the constituent assembly. We need to perform our authentic founding act in order to constitute Bangladesh, from which we are deprived till today. We need to have a democratic state first to exercise democracy in elections. If the state is unconstitutional, undemocratic, anti-people and communal by nature, it is irrelevant if election is 'free, fair or inclusive'.
Election is not democracy. The people of Bangladesh want democracy and that is the prime reason why they do not want to go back to January 11, 2007. We do not need a parliament now to stamp unconstitutional acts as 'constitutional', a farce that we must reject. But this is the only constitutional 'exit' that the present regime will seek and fight to avail by all means. So making a new order is indeed on the political agenda of Bangladesh. People may have different perception of the kind of change they cherish and expect. Such perceptions are generated from various class and gender positions. Given the task ahead we can identify the role they might play in the future theatre of our national politics.
Making new order demands that we start to contemplate to constitute ourselves politically, start thinking about the state to come. Present order must be demolished and we must start thinking what type of state we need, given our experience since 1971. We need a new republic that can defend our lives and livelihood, ensure us freedom and human rights, protect our environment and ecology, reorganise trade and international relations for collective prosperity and install strong and independent judiciary to stand by the oppressed against exploitation and injustice. Making a new order implies initiating a process that can culminate into the decisive political act of founding Bangladesh on the authentic democratic constitution. We can start by claiming the sovereignty of the popular will making the second birth of Bangladesh imminent, transcending the present disorder.
2
INTERNATIONAL power is directly responsible for the present unconstitutional order of Bangladesh, not only because some powerful states constantly intervened into the internal political affairs of the country but also because they are lacking critical assessment of the development policies they have been implementing since independence. It is important to wake up to the fact that Bangladesh is an obvious example of blatant failure of development experiment. International power including their donors must take responsibility for this failure rather than blaming (1) 'two ladies' (Khaleda Zia and Sheikh Hasina), (2) conflictual political culture of Bangladesh (arguing often in racist terms as if it is a genetic defect of the people of Bangladesh) and (3) fear of Islamic takeover (without addressing the most critical question of how to engage Islam in democratic state building). The country is still economically surviving because of the domestic and migrant working people and progressive entrepreneurial ethics of people ready to take lead in economic development. While working masses are courageously struggling with their sweat and blood to keep the economy running, the entrepreneurs have to learn diligently from the intense competition and survival strategies in a 'friendless' world. The political survival draws strength from the creative attitude to life and reality and hope in a better future, but most importantly, in the ability to make best efforts to get the bests from the existing political opportunity, such as casting the votes in the right box if scope is provided.
Bangladesh inherits the political culture of 1971, the culture of forging political unity when moments arrive and unitedly they can stand against the enemy of the people. If people of Bangladesh consider international power as their 'enemy' and primary hindrance in achieving democracy and economic prosperity, it is because of their failure in making honest efforts to understand Bangladesh. The economic, social, cultural and political aspirations of the people of Bangladesh have been systematically ignored and interventionist development policies and programmes have been implemented destroying the very fabric of society. Exploiting poor with high interests from credit money has been touted as poverty alleviation and women's empowerment. The contradictions and antagonisms such exploitation installs in the rural areas, creating conditions for negative political tendencies, have been awarded with 'peace prize'. In the area of environment, ecology, biodiversity, agriculture, nutrition, health – one can pick up any sector, rampant corruption introduced by development agencies, accomplished both by multilateral and bilateral development partners, essentially to serve economic interest of the developed countries. The health policy that has been drafted precisely aims to totally dismantle primary health care and forego the gains of the Drug Policy of 1982 in order to privatise healthcare services only for the rich and allowing pharmaceutical companies to dictate the price of medicine. Health has been turned into a private industry, totally disregarding the need of the people. The task of ensuring food security has been systematically taken over from the farmers and given to trans-national corporations. The systematic destruction of farmer's seed systems to replace with company's commercial seeds is alarming and accelerating destruction of farming by forced introduction of hybrids and GMOs. Recently the concerns regarding climate change has been elevated to a kind of 'development industry'. Rather than addressing the flaws in development policies and addressing the challenge of climate change in social and economic context, a crisis of global dimension, suddenly all problems of Bangladesh are being reduced into a problem of Mother Nature. Bangladesh is going to be inundated with the rise of the sea level and it is argued that to meet this climatic (natural) disasters, the people of Bangladesh must 'adopt' their lives to the dictation of the international donors, so that lifestyles of the rich countries can go on as usual. Such interventionist policies, explicitly intending to shift the debate from the socio-economic, political and lifestyle ground to natural calamities are posing serious national threats to the people of Bangladesh. These examples are enough to indicate the responsibility of the so-called 'development partners' and their countries should immediately stop ridiculous charges and blame games.
A converging position is easily available to the people of Bangladesh and the democratic people of the world. If we are ready to respond to the call of the people of Bangladesh that they do not want to be ruled and exploited by their own corrupt politician and political system and similarly they do not want to fall prey to any form of destructive extremist politics that will throw them into an abyss, permanently damaging their hope to be part of the global community, enabling environment must be created for creative and positive dialogue. To make a new order the people of Bangladesh must also realise that while they have serious contradictions and antagonisms with the international powers and the donor community, particularly their development policies and interventions, and therefore they must oppose the constant political intervention into the internal affairs, they also have a major stake in convincing international community and the citizens of the world that it is the global spirit of friendship and understanding that could keep Bangladesh strictly in a positive track record. Any narrow and closed politics of identity based on religion, culture, language, ethnicity or whatever could displace us from realising our aspiration as a political community. This is the reason why I insist on the notion of 'political community' and prefer to avoid the old and ambiguous notion of nation-state to identify our present task. The notion of 'nation-state' assumes that imagining of a people as nation, defined by ethnicity, religion, culture or language, etc, can inevitably justify their culmination into a political state. In the era of globalisation the life and the conditions of life itself is threatened and intense global competition in the market and constant intervention of the weak by the strong states is a permanent threat that can only be addressed by inaugurating Bangladesh with strong democratic and participatory foundation. Bangladesh needs to constitute into a sovereign power in the form of a political state where people are citizens and their rights are protected by the democratic constitution explicitly stating that it is the constitutional responsibility of the state to ensure protection of life and livelihood not only from external threats and enemies, but also from domestic threats that kills us, most importantly, destruction and erosion of environment, ecology, biodiversity and genetic resources. State must protect the conditions of life as the founding principle of the constitution, such as the security of environment, ecology and biodiversity. New Bangladesh must provide food, water, housing, clothes and health – the basic requirement of life without hindering people's own efforts to ensure these for them. The new state must protect dignity and individuality of persons and all the fundamental rights of citizens. We need strong judiciary capable to take decision without any intimidation from executive or the law makers' organ. All citizens should enjoy these rights irrespective of their religious, ethnic, linguistic or other cultural identities. This is the reason I would always like to insist that we must go beyond the stereotype and poor and imprudent intellectual exercise of framing the political problem of Bangladesh as a conflict between the secularists and the Islamists. Our enemies are those classes and forces who are constantly frustrating our efforts to create an enabling political culture where the necessity of reorganising, rethinking and putting forward a precise and pragmatic futuristic option is accelerated and strengthened. These enemies are present in the so-called 'secularist' camps as well as in the 'Islamist' camps.
There are a large number of old Cold War allies of the United States among the so-called 'Islamists', faithfully serving the warmongering global power breeding violence, war and death, since cold war legacies are not over, but the international community and the development agencies indulged in bitter campaigns against the people of Bangladesh blaming that we are harbouring Islamist terrorists and accusing that Bangladesh is changing from a secular to an Islamic state. The imperial interventionist powers want us to remain divided as secularists and Islamists in order to play with us with our ignorant obsessions and infantile idiocy, while they can reconfigure Bangladesh into a security state under their dictation to conduct their war against terrorism. The event of January 11, 2007 is not accidental but continuity of the implementing process of this strategy and completion of the process started much earlier to take over national agencies responsible for security and intelligence to serve international security needs.
Rather than letting the toiling masses decide their politics and polity – allowing them to create their own political narratives of democracy and people's power in order to defend their rights as citizens and decide the path to social, economic and cultural transformation – the international power is engaged in a dangerous game of dividing the country between the so-called 'secularists' and 'Islamists'. Their developmental and political intervention, dictated by the paranoia of real or perceived Islamist threat and mobilisation of classes and forces into such stereotype binary opposition will soon throw them into deep and irreversible political and development crisis. It is mainly because the people did not buy this binary antagonism, but rather identified the international power, particularly the development community, as the real threat to realise their democratic aspirations. While it is definitely true that Islam can be abused and used against the spirit of individual freedom and political democracy, it is also true that it has been used as a tool in the Cold War against the progressive and democratic aspiration of the people. Some forms of Islamism, institutionalised and politically strong, are still strong allies of the US not only in the 'war against terrorism', but in opposing popular movements and aspirations of the people. People are capable to identify them. Since the cold war legacy is not over in Bangladesh. Islamists still hate the so-called 'communists' and similarly the so-called 'secularists' or the 'communists' thrive on Islam phobia and hatred against Islam.
So, posing secularists against Islamists is a politics that we must avoid, deny and oppose if we are at all serious in making a new order. These are old legacies and old habits of uncritical mind and politics of imperial war. We must engage with both secularists and Islamists to win them in favour of the present task: constituting popular sovereignty in Bangladesh. People's enemies will be decided by who opposes our present tasks. The world has changed and European religions, values and political ideas are not the only resources available to civilisation. Islam and Islamic civilisation, like other religions, are part and parcel of world history. We are rich and graced not only by Islam, Bangladesh must not give up her right to the grand resources of Hindu, Buddha, Jaina and all religious and spiritual traditions. Constituting popular sovereignty means that people do not recognise any other authority to interpret religious, moral, political, social, economic and cultural texts and histories but the popular will. A separate and independent authority beyond the will and the determination of the people is contradictory to popular sovereignty. As long as we refuse to accept authority of any person to misread or interpret sacred texts to pose them against the interest of people we will be able to absorb our spiritual and knowledge practices into our democratic political culture and practices.
It is time that the people of Bangladesh start thinking how to make the donors and development agencies accountable to them, but in addition and most importantly, to the respective countries' taxpayers. Evidence suggests that local diplomatic missions played crucial role in bringing about the present military-backed extra-constitutional takeover and consequent military-controlled regime. International community now must take the responsibility for the mess they have created. International media and some think-tanks are repeatedly designating this change as 'military rule', despite the civilian facade. Although there is no mechanism available to the people of Bangladesh to make powerful countries accountable for their role, it is important that we must learn to demarcate concerns and tasks in contrasts to their designs and objectives. We will definitely be supported by the people around the world who are committed to democracy and justice.
[* Moderator's Note - CHOTTALA is a non-profit, non-religious, non-political and non-discriminatory organization.
* Disclaimer: Any posting to the CHOTTALA are the opinion of the author. Authors of the messages to the CHOTTALA are responsible for the accuracy of their information and the conformance of their material with applicable copyright and other laws. Many people will read your post, and it will be archived for a very long time. The act of posting to the CHOTTALA indicates the subscriber's agreement to accept the adjudications of the moderator]
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe
__,_._,___
