Is distance between govt and BNP centring election only

BNP’s acting chairman Tarique Rahman, standing committee member Salahuddin Ahmed, and Mirza Abbas have recently made some comments that make it seem as though BNP is the main opposition party to the interim government. Although BNP also played a major role in the process of forming the interim government led by Dr Yunus after the fall of the Awami League in the face of an uprising in August last. From the beginning, BNP has been saying that the interim government is their government; but, just a few months after this government assumed office on August 8 of last year, a distance or tension began to emerge between the government and BNP. This raises the question: is this distance between the government and BNP only about the election issue, or are there any more reasons behind it?

Statements of BNP leaders
Speaking as the chief guest at the inauguration event of BNP’s membership form distribution and membership renewal programme at the Shilpakala Academy in Cumilla on May 15, Mirza Abbas said, “The independence and sovereignty of the country are not safe with the current government; the geographical integrity of the country is now under threat. Previously, we were in the mouth of a dog, now we have fallen from the dog’s mouth into the mouth of a tiger.”

“The interim government has no authority to hand over the Chattogram Port or provide corridor to foreigners. The authority to decide on this lies with a political government,” said BNP’s acting chairman Tarique Rahman while virtually addressing the anniversary event of the Nationalist Democratic Movement (NDM) on May 17 night, adding, “Instability within the government is becoming visible. The public is questioning their capability. Moreover, under the pretext of reforms, they are avoiding the announcement of a specific election date through various tactics.”

Addressing Chief Adviser Dr Muhammad Yunus at a rally at Khulna Circuit House grounds on the same day at noon, BNP standing committee member Salahuddin Ahmed said, “In your government, you have made a foreign citizen the national security advisor. Do you not have the sense to understand — how will the country’s military submit security-related reports to a foreign citizen! Under the pretense of a humanitarian corridor, he wants to turn Bangladesh into a battlefield. Remove that national security adviser.”

Salahuddin also said, “We don’t know what contracts you’ve made abroad. You are casually handing over Bangladesh’s seaports, river ports, corridors — all to foreigners — what agreements have you made? What authority do you have? With what mandate have you come?” (The Daily Star Online, May 17, 2025).

On May 12, at an event in the capital, Mirza Abbas said, “Many suspicious foreigners have arrived in the country. They are coming with various missions at various times. The interim government is serving someone’s purpose. This government, under no circumstances, is a people-friendly or patriotic government. Many of the government’s advisers are not citizens of Bangladesh. Sometimes I feel — are we under colonial rule?”

Why is BNP’s language changing?
Several other senior BNP leaders have recently spoken in roughly the same tone and manner. Their criticism of the government — in terms of language and choice of words — is becoming increasingly aggressive. In the beginning, BNP supported the government, and along with calls for justice and reform, their position was focused on restoring people’s voting rights and initiating a democratic process through a free, fair, acceptable, and credible election. That position is gradually shifting.

The party may be starting to realise — or perhaps had already realised but now believes more strongly — that the national parliamentary election promised by the chief adviser to be held between coming December and June 2026 may not take place. The party probably is assuming that the National Citizens’ Party, and even religion-based parties like Jamaat-e-Islami and Islami Andolan Bangladesh, will take to the field with certain agendas and apply pressure on the government to delay the election even further.

In the beginning, the main reason for BNP’s positive tone regarding the interim government was likely that they thought — or believed — the government would soon initiate some reforms and begin the trial process for the cases filed over the mass murder allegations in the July uprising, and then hand over power to an elected government. The broader reform and trial processes would be completed by the elected government. BNP had also indicated that even if they won enough seats to form a government, they would still, in the greater interest of the country, form a national government and attempt to restore economic and political stability based on consensus from all sides.

But BNP is now probably thinking or believing that the government will not act beyond what the National Citizens' Party (NCP) says or wants. Or, whatever the government wants to do, it will do so through the NCP — considered the government’s main stakeholder — or use the NCP to exert pressure on itself.

Perhaps for this reason, Salahuddin Ahmed said, addressing the head of the interim government: “People are calling your government an NCP-branded government. Two representatives of the NCP are present in your government — they are advisers and affiliated with the NCP. If you want to maintain neutrality, ask these two NCP-branded individuals to resign. If they do not resign, then remove them yourself.”

The NCP is a completely new party — one that is not even registered with the Election Commission yet. But still, BNP may believe — and many politically aware people in the country also believe — that this party could become BNP’s biggest challenge in the upcoming election. The NCP may not field candidates in all 300 constituencies on its own; however, if it forms an electoral alliance with BNP’s long-time ally Jamaat, and the Charmonai Pir’s party Islami Andolan Bangladesh and if Hefazat-e-Islam also supports this alliance — there are discussions about whether BNP will then find itself cornered. As the activities of the Awami League have been banned, it is more or less certain that they will not be able to contest in the upcoming election.

So, there is also a lot of discussion around who will get the Awami League's votes. It is true that the NCP or the Islamist parties are unlikely to get those votes. Then will BNP get the Awami League’s votes? If so, BNP’s chances of coming to power become very strong. This equation is clear to the NCP, Jamaat, Islami Andolan, and Hefazat-e-Islam — all of them. Therefore, if they do not want BNP to come to power, their joint effort may be to delay the election and bring forward such issues or create such situations that make it impossible to hold the election within June of next year. Now the question is: why would parties outside of BNP want this? Or, what problem do they have if BNP comes to power?

I asked this question to a senior leader of Islami Andolan Bangladesh. He said that they do not believe the country will automatically move in the right direction or that a democratic process will truly begin just because an elected government comes to power. Because in the past too, elected governments came to power with the people’s mandate and then turned authoritarian, fascist, and anti-people. Therefore, they do not see handing over power to an elected government as the only solution. For that reason, they want some fundamental reforms in politics, and they express concern that if elections are held before those reforms are carried out, the country will continue along the same old trajectory.

This makes one thing clear: even among the allied parties that participated in the July uprising, there is not yet a unified consensus regarding whether the election should be held by June of next year. There is ample reason to believe that as long as BNP, Jamaat, Islami Andolan, NCP, and Hefazat do not speak in one voice regarding the election roadmap, the government may not announce a definitive election date.

Another complication here is that even though elections are said to be held by next June, it is still not clear what kind of election it will be, whether it will be the 13th National Parliament election, whether it will be the Constituent Assembly election, whether it will be a yes-no vote on the legitimacy of the Yunus government, or whether it will be a local government election. This kind of camouflage or ambiguity surrounding the election appears to be one of the major reasons for the growing distance between BNP and the government. A similar fog of uncertainty has arisen over other issues too — such as the UN-proposed humanitarian corridor, the Chattogram port, foreign or dual citizens in the advisory council, especially the issue of the foreign citizenship of the national security adviser.

If BNP truly believes that Dr Yunus’s government is “serving the purpose of another country”; if BNP believes that the government is playing “hide and seek” on the issues of the corridor and the Chattogram Port — then that is one matter. But if the reality is that they are trying to generate public opinion against the government by creating various negative narratives in order to come to power quickly through elections — then that is another issue.

In such a situation, the government should clarify its position on the issues that are raising questions or creating confusion. It should present evidence to the public that it is not, in fact, implementing the agenda of any foreign company or another country; that there are no foreign or dual citizens in its advisory council. If such facts are brought to light, the public will understand that BNP’s allegations are purely political rhetoric, and any doubts about the government’s goodwill and sincerity will also be removed.

Ameen Al Rashid: Journalist and writer