Failure of pro-Liberation War forces and then...

The failure of the pro-Liberation War forces is certainly one of the reasons behind the rise of anti-Liberation fundamentalist forces. They couldn’t deliver anything. They couldn’t show the youth a dream of the future. Firstly, that dream was never realised. The second is that unemployment has increased, poverty has increased. When people are unemployed, when they are poor, they seek shelter, they seek assurance; but here, society and the state are not providing shelter and assurance. People are struggling on their own, remaining unemployed, suffering from despair, not receiving justice, not finding refuge. For justice, for shelter, they then turn to religion. In the hope that even if not in this world, they will find justice in the afterlife.

Religion gives them an assurance that there is justice, that it will be served. And another matter is the lack of change and the absence of improvement in situation. The dream that existed has shattered, and Bangladesh has become a country of shattered dreams. Therefore, out of despair, due to unemployment, due to poverty, people are turning to religion. The third issue is madrasa education.

A dangerous thing has developed here. Our ruling class will never send their children to madrasas, they will send them to English-medium schools; but they encourage madrasa education. They do so for two specific reasons. First, they think it is a religious act and brings easy reputation. With little expense, they gain some social acclaim. And in the afterlife, they will have a place too. They commit many injustices in this life, but expect good rewards in return.

Second, even though it is unclear, there is an intention among them that the poor should be kept poorer. The poor go to madrasas, and there they become even poorer. This bondage of poverty is a cycle, and they get trapped in it. A madrasa student will not be able to get out of that. He faces two difficulties. First, he does not acquire any useful knowledge that could enable him to participate in production. Second, he gains a sense of pride that he is educated. Not just educated, but religiously educated. So he believes he is morally superior to other educated people. As a result, he remains unemployed, becomes disillusioned, and it is from these madrasas that militants are emerging. This militant education and madrasa education are flowing together.

Pakistan once encouraged madrasa education. They created the Taliban to fight the Soviet Union. Now Pakistan feels endangered by madrasas, wants to shut them down, and is trying to modernise their syllabuses. They have introduced rules that even the so-called Qawmi madrasas must now obtain government permission to operate. So it has become clear from Pakistan’s experience how dangerous madrasa education can be. In our country too, the more madrasa education spreads, the more we are encouraging militancy and nurturing their breeding grounds. Our governments are competing to see who can go further in promoting madrasa education. They are not even thinking of stopping it, instead expanding it as much as possible.

There is no strong protest against these various social inequalities because the middle class here has become fragmented. The role the middle class played in 1971 is not seen in student activities now. A section of the middle class has risen to the top. Another section has fallen to the bottom. Those who have risen have become part of the capitalist-oriented ruling class. Those who have fallen are struggling for livelihood, being crushed by the battle for life. So as a class, the middle class today cannot play a protesting role; but within this class there are people who want social change. These people do talk. They reflect among themselves, feel deeply; but we have not been able to build an organised movement where they would join. It is this lower middle class that is the key. They are the ones who talk at tea stalls, who read newspapers. They influence the voters; but they have not yet become an organised alternative political force, meaning a leftist alternative. We have not been able to build that alternative political force. This lower middle class is resentful of the ruling class, they criticise them, joke about who is taking bribes and how much, have no respect for them, but they see no alternative. Therefore, an alternative must be created today. This alternative will not come from the right; it will come from the left.

In the past, seeing the success of the left in West Bengal, many asked why it did not happen here. But the leftists of West Bengal and Bangladesh are not the same. The West Bengali middle class who were effective were about 50 years ahead of us. That is historically true. They were ahead in education, ahead in employment. Our middle class, in fact, only developed during the Pakistan period. When this middle class began leaning left, the Liberation War came and gave them independence and many opportunities. The state then pulled them to its side. The state took them in and turned them into servants of the state, slaves of the state, and unleashed them against the people.

Here, at one time, the leaders of the left movement were from the Hindu community. After 1947, facing persecution and humiliation, some went into hiding, many were imprisoned, and some left for the other side. That created a vacuum. At that time, Muslim leftists were just beginning to emerge but could not develop. Because they had to take shelter in the Pakistan movement. At the very moment they were about to develop, a vacuum appeared— the vacuum of 1947. Again came the vacuum of 1971, which on one hand brought opportunities. On the other hand, the leftists became confused. They could not stand firm in their own position.

We are still bearing the intense consequences of the killing of intellectuals on December 14, 1971. Firstly, many talented people left us. Their absence from politics is a historical defeat for us. It showed that justice would not be achieved here. These events would continue. Even after the killing of the intellectuals, many other killings occurred, for which there has been no justice either. So this failure of justice has been very damaging to us mentally. It has also been damaging culturally. Al-Badr, the Razakars have almost regained state power, under the patronage of the state and government. When Nizami, who was an organiser of the Al-Badr force, became a minister, a psychological sense of failure arose that those who were martyred died in vain. We couldn’t even ban the politics of those who annihilated them, rather now they are at the peak of power. This creates a sense of failure. So on one hand there was a deficit of talent, on the other hand, a sense of failure emerged, leading to despair.

Still, it cannot be said that the spirit of the Liberation War has failed. Although Jamaat has gained some acceptance, although fundamentalist forces have flourished in the country, they have accepted Bangladesh. However, they have not apologised. They should have apologised. They are hypocrites.

Many say Jamaat people have reached high positions in the administration and are proving themselves more competent than others. Jamaat has taken the opportunity of the changed situation and succeeded in placing their people in various posts as part of their mission to capture the administration. They have been placed in various places with the shelter of the government. These people cannot be said to be qualified. Once placed, they gained power. With power, their greed increased. They became Jamaat followers because they could not internalise modern education and democratic values. These people, living in darkness, are the ones who support Jamaat. If examined closely, one will find a personal despair caused by failure in life among them. That is the main reason.

Sirajul Islam Chowdhury: Emeritus Professor, University of Dhaka