Bangladesh: Reinventing the right – rationale and implications

by MEGHNA GUHATHAKURTA

The April 6 rally of Hefajat-e-Islam at Motijheel. PHOTO/Indrajit Ghosh

Radicalisation of mass thinking whether it comes from the left or from the right is never a comfortable position for any establishment to find itself in. That is why the processes of conflict are closely watched by the powers that be. I remember while doing research on 1971 during my PhD course, I was going through several CIA reports that were disclosed through Senate hearings during that period. The reports spoke about keeping tab on freedom fighters with administrative jobs, i.e. those who worked as part of the government in exile and held radical views. The fear of radicalisation of the freedom fighters as well as the Bangladesh liberation war itself was a serious consideration not only for the US intelligence but also for Indira Gandhi’s administration. The reports naturally focused on the fact that the more the time lapsed, the more likely the war would become more radicalised. It must be remembered that the US in the middle of popular resistance at home was then deeply involved in the Vietnam War and the prospect of having a second Vietnam in Asia would have been the last thing they would have wanted. Although we are no longer talking of such a context, significant radical trends in a population of 160 million always ring an alarm bell in the corridors of power.

When the Shahbagh movement led by a young generation of bloggers followed by the mass who took to the streets, spontaneously burst onto the scene to protest against a verdict pronounced by the International Crimes Tribunal, it also projected onto the scene memories and trajectories of the liberation war that had the effect of radicalising the moment. The hundreds and thousands who thronged to the area enacted various rituals that brought home the spirit of 1971. But at the same time, it was not 1971. Shahbagh took place in the context of a majoritarian democratic system, where a section of the populace wanted to hold the elected government to its promise of fulfilling its election mandate to try the war criminals of 1971. This situation was aggravated by the fact that it was the last year before elections, and both the ruling and the opposition parties had strategized or were in the process of strategizing their conflicting game plans for an election, which if actualised promised to be a violent one.

New Age for more

(Thanks to Robin Khundkar)