Is conflicts obvious to resolve political crisis?

"Might is right", this very phrase has a special aspect in filling the vote-bank using raw muscle power in countries like ours. Thus this popular phrase has been playing a vital role in choosing the path of conflicts in Bangladesh's politics. Senior politicians have also spoken about this on various occasions which means one can defeat the opponents in polls by establishing supremacy on the streets, not by initiating dialogue or negotiation. This statement is the main obstacle in the way of reconciliation between the rival political parties. Because all sides think that they should win busing muscle power. People think confrontation and violence will only make the opponent weak and for this reason, resolving major political crisis through dialogue is unprecedented in the history of Bangladesh.

If we had believed in democratic principles, it would have been possible to make a reasonable decision for the welfare of the country and the people through negotiation and dialogue avoiding bloody conflict or anti-people movement. But even after half a century of the formation of the Bangladesh state, no mutual respect or trusted relationship has developed among the political parties.

As a result, an undemocratic provision like caretaker government was added to the Constitution to serve the interest of democracy. But the fact is, the necessity of the inclusion of the undemocratic provision to the Constitution is still exists as the recent political events prove it. In other words, since the election under the ruling party is not acceptable and credible to the opposition parties, that is why the caretaker government system was added to the Constitution as a temporary provision during the election. The provision was repealed by the Fifteenth Amendment in 1995-96. But the question is whether the country's is moving backwards to the 1995-96 period. In other words, BNP is now agitating on the same topic on which the then opposition party Awami League was agitating for a non-partisan government during the election.

The ruling Awami League, who once protested for this provision, is now calling the provision undemocratic and unconstitutional. The movement suffered a lot of blood loss. Again BNP called the provision undemocratic, now they are adamant in favor of that demand. In other words, the condition which is deemed undemocratic, unconstitutional by the ruling party - the same term is democratic when they are in opposition! So the fact that free-fair-neutral-acceptable and controversy-free elections are possible under a party government is not believed by all the political parties in the country and there is still no consensus on this issue. As a result, even though a non-party system during elections is undemocratic, BNP and its partners are agitating for its restoration. Ahead of the January 5, 2014 elections, violence erupted across the country with petrol bombs and gunpowder attacks. Many people lost their lives. Bangladesh was free from that horrific scene for almost a decade.

There was not much violence in that sense before the 2018 elections. Despite the defeat of the BNP in the 11th National Assembly elections, they did not start the politics of violence in protest. Rather, their politics in recent years has been fairly peaceful and orderly. Even though the chairperson of the party was convicted in a corruption case and went to jail, the kind of violence that was feared did not happen. Rather, BNP has tried to conduct the movement in a systematic manner. Again, when a powerful party like Awami League is in power and the entire state machinery is under the control of the ruling party, there is no chance to avoid the question of how much it is possible to succeed in building a large-scale movement against them. But even then, the kind of protest programmes that BNP is waging in recent years, there was a big fall in the rhythm centering the October 28 rally.

Incidentally, Jamaat-e-Islami, a party close to BNP, became active in politics a few days before this October 28th rally. Jamaat, the party that became cornered after the cancellation of their registration and the death sentence and life imprisonment of the party's top leaders for their involvement in crimes against humanity during the liberation war, suddenly geared up. Although the rally on October 28th was called by the BNP, Jamaat also announced to occupy the capital's Shapla Chattar on this day. A large number of members of law enforcement agencies were in the field along with members of BNP-Awami League and Jamaat. A tri-party fight broke out in Paltan and Kakrail areas of the capital.

Now it is a big question as to why BNP's so far peaceful agitation programmes suddenly turned into violent ones. Who instigated it? The Jamaat, who are accused of staging violent programmes, should be investigated for the extent of their activities behind the October 28 violence. The role of the ruling party, BNP and even the law enforcers needs to be looked into frankly.

Staying in power is the root cause of political violence in Bangladesh. That is, being in power by any means and wanting to be in power by any means opens the way to violence. Especially once someone sits in power, they don't want to come down from there. Bypassing, influencing or debating the electoral system, the desire to remain in power encourages the opposing side to choose the path of conflict. Many times it happens that during the fight between the two parties, the third party takes the opportunity and seizes power.

Awami League's movement in 1995-96 demanding a caretaker government after the 1990s coup, BNP's movement against the Awami League government before the 2001 elections, Awami League's movement against the caretaker government led by the then president Iajuddin in 2007, BNP's election boycott movement in 2013-14 is a repeat of the same incident.

The question is, without conflict, is the problem not solved or the solution not created? The past history of Bangladesh says that no major political crisis can be resolved through dialogue. That's because no one is willing to give up supremacy. One side has to be flexible in arguments and in discussion and dialogue. If any party is at fault, the fault is detected. The mistakes have to be accept for logical reasons.

But no one is willing to admit their mistakes. They don't like the path of discussion and dialogue because they don't agree. The opposition feels that since there will be no solution through talks, a movement should be waged to force the government to accept the demands. That is why the movement stays no longer peaceful or non-violent. Arson attacks and violence started. The wealth of the country is wasted and common people loss their lives. But the government's intention is not to let the movement succeed. Either way, the opposition must be suppressed. That is why state forces are used to the maximum. Mass arrests are being conducted.

Arrests of opponents have probably surpassed all previous records this time. All the important leaders of BNP are now in jail, except for a few. Those who were not arrested are also in hiding. That is, the government is now on the final hardline. In such situations poaching attacks increase. The panic attack continues. If top leaders are not in the field, small and medium leaders make many mistakes while carrying out big responsibilities. The extent of the mistake is not only cost the party, but also the country. Once the process of eradicating a group begins, it can often go underground and become more dangerous. Sometimes a relatively tolerant group can end up turning into a militant organization when it falls into the hands of a radical force. So, as a non-violent political programme is the expectation of the countrymen, those who are in the government have to take care that suppressing opponents apparently by using the state forces can create bigger crisis inside. It should be remembered that the responsibility of the government for the security of the country and its people is much greater than that of the opposition party.

It is said that only an acceptable electoral system can end the political conflict. Is it true? The people of the country will continue to live happily and peacefully only if there are free-fair-participatory and above all acceptable elections; Corruption-irregularity-looting-money laundering-harassment of citizens in government offices will stop and the media will be able to publish and disseminate all the truth freely; On social media, citizens may feel free to express themselves or question the authorities—is unlikely. Because a party that comes to power through an acceptable election can also be the ultimate dictator, can be immersed in irregularities and corruption. That is, elections are not the only way to transition to democracy and a people-friendly governance system. Rather, a good election can play a role in building good governance. But if the relationship of trust and respect is not developed among the political parties; If state institutions cannot be made people-friendly; If the rule of law cannot be ensured; If good governance and accountability cannot be ensured—the path to conflict will not end. Instead, the same thing will repeat itself during elections every five years. The hapless CNG autorickshaw driver will watch his livelihood burn before his eyes. But those who set the fire, maybe some of them are relatives, friends or neighbours of that CNG driver. Power politics denies that friendship, that bond of kinship or even the love of friendship.

Power blinds people, makes man so blind that he doesn't even recognize his friend. Being blinded by the fascination of this power for ages, no one wants to get off after riding on the back of the tiger called power. Because the tiger might eat him after getting off its back—this fear is always awake in his mind.

Author: Current Affairs Editor, Nexus Television.