In a press conference held at the Awami League (AL) President’s Dhanmondi political office, General Secretary Obaidul Quader voiced profound concerns over the conspicuous silence of Western nations, including the United States, and the so-called civil society regarding the disruptive activities aimed at undermining the integrity of the upcoming 12th general elections in Bangladesh.
Quader’s remarks ignited a crucial debate on the global stage, prompting an in-depth analysis of the implications of this silence and the potential consequences for Bangladesh’s democratic process. The perplexing question posed by Quader—why are Western countries and civil society remaining reticent in the face of overt attempts to disrupt elections—requires a nuanced examination of the political dynamics at play.
The crux of Quader’s critique lies in the absence of international condemnation and punitive measures against those orchestrating programs to obstruct the electoral process in Bangladesh. Despite the Bangladesh Nationalist Party’s (BNP) deployment of disruptive tactics such as strikes, blockades, and acts of sabotage, there has been a notable lack of discourse on imposing sanctions against such actions. This raises fundamental questions about the global commitment to upholding democratic principles and the role of the international community in safeguarding the sanctity of elections.
Quader’s bewilderment extends to whether the BNP’s actions can be classified as a legitimate movement or blatant efforts to obstruct the elections. He challenges the silence of civilized democratic nations that traditionally advocate for human rights, good governance, and free, fair elections, calling for a reassessment of their stance on the unfolding events in Bangladesh.
The general secretary’s criticism also extends to the so-called civil society, which he accuses of failing to raise its voice against the destructive acts of the BNP. This raises critical questions about the role and responsibility of civil society in preserving democratic values and holding political actors accountable for their actions.
A deeper examination of the ongoing situation reveals that the BNP’s imposition of hartals and blockades is a concerted effort to halt the scheduled elections on January 7. Quader’s contention that these actions should be recognized as anti-election acts aligns with international norms, where any interference with the electoral process is typically met with global scrutiny and condemnation.
The AL general secretary’s lamentation over the international community’s silence underscores the need for a comprehensive understanding of the geopolitical considerations that may be influencing key players to withhold commentary on the unfolding events in Bangladesh. Factors such as strategic alliances, economic interests, and diplomatic sensitivities may be contributing to the reluctance of Western countries to take a decisive stance on the disruptive activities.
In light of the BNP’s actions, which include police killings, attacks on the Chief Justice’s residence, and arson incidents, Quader contends that these incidents cannot be concealed or ignored. He calls for international attention and condemnation of these publicized events, urging the global community to consider the gravity of such actions on the democratic fabric of Bangladesh.
Quader’s warning that cases will be filed against those involved in misconduct and punishable offenses signals a commitment to accountability within the domestic legal framework. However, the lack of international scrutiny on these incidents raises questions about the effectiveness of global mechanisms in holding individuals and entities accountable for actions that violate democratic norms.
Turning attention to the constitutional timeframe for the general elections, Quader unequivocally affirms the Awami League’s commitment to adhering to the stipulated schedule. This commitment serves as a declaration of the party’s dedication to democratic principles and a rejection of any attempts to manipulate or delay the electoral process.
On the subject of seat sharing among allies, Quader’s assertion that the Awami League will prioritize candidates within the 14-party alliance based on their capability to win elections introduces an important dimension to the discussion. This approach emphasizes meritocracy over mere party affiliation, reflecting a commitment to ensuring the representation of competent individuals in the democratic process.
The press conference, where Quader voiced these concerns, was attended by prominent figures within the Awami League, including AL Organizing Secretary BM Mozammel Haque, Office Secretary Biplab Barua, Liberation War Affairs Secretary Mrinal Kanti Das, and Deputy Office Secretary Sayem Khan. Their presence highlights the collective concern within the party regarding the perceived threats to the democratic process in Bangladesh.
As the international community grapples with a myriad of challenges, ranging from geopolitical tensions to global health crises, the situation in Bangladesh serves as a litmus test for the strength of democratic values on the global stage. The deafening silence on disruptive election activities raises profound questions about the consistency of international commitment to democratic principles and the extent to which political considerations may be influencing responses to such incidents.
The situation in Bangladesh demands a comprehensive and nuanced examination of the geopolitical, economic, and diplomatic factors that may be contributing to the international community’s silence. It also calls for a reassessment of the role of civil society in preserving democratic values and holding political actors accountable. As Bangladesh navigates the complexities of its electoral process, the world watches, and the international community faces a critical juncture in reaffirming its commitment to upholding the principles of democracy.
