Following the peaceful holding of the January 7 general election and the subsequent formation of the government, Bangladesh’s largest ultra-Islamist political force, the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP), is clearly in the doldrums. Its expectation of jeopardizing the election with active support from the Biden administration has fallen flat. Key policymakers in Washington have repeatedly rejected BNP’s plea to exert pressure on the ruling Awami League to hold the January 7 election under an unelected caretaker regime.
Meanwhile, there is growing frustration and anger within party leaders and activists against its acting chairman, Tarique Rahman. Most of them consider him a “huge burden” or “heavy cargo”. Due to Tarique’s whimsical and immature decisions, the party is already facing threats of political bankruptcy.
With the election now over and the new government formed, some grassroots BNP leaders think things would have been much different if the party high-ups had an alternative plan for their anti-government movement. Others argue that instead of boycotting the election, BNP should have participated and not waited for any miracle to happen with direct intervention from Western nations.
Meanwhile, talking to Dhaka’s leading English newspaper The Daily Star, BNP Senior Joint Secretary General Ruhul Kabir Rizvi said every movement has its phases before the final outcome.
He further said, it took 200 years to oust the British from this land, but there were many movements in between, he said, adding, “party leaders and activists are charged up and our movement will continue till the goal is achieved”.
But a very large segment of the BNP activists already see Rizvi’s statement as “extremely frustrating” as now the party leaders are suggesting their supporters and activists to wait for a very long period, while there is no sign of Tarique Rahman’s returning to Bangladesh.
In the aftermath of Bangladesh’s January 7 election, the demand for an unelected “caretaker government” proposed by the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) has been met with skepticism and disapproval from key policymakers in the United States. Despite persistent lobbying and substantial financial investments by the BNP, Western leaders, including influential members of the US Congress, firmly reject the notion of holding elections under an unelected entity like a caretaker government.
Members of the US Congress from both the Democratic and Republican parties have expressed their opposition to the concept of a caretaker government, fearing its potential impact on the established democratic processes. According to some strategists within the US intelligence establishment, political legitimacy, derived from various social and political spheres, takes precedence over constitutional legitimacy. They argue that the BNP has failed to convincingly illustrate political legitimacy, relying mostly on its rank and file for support.
While the BNP may have garnered sympathy from the public, it lacks the trust and confidence required to effect meaningful changes in Bangladesh’s governance. The recent political violence during BNP blockades, though less severe than in previous years, has raised concerns, particularly considering the nation’s economic progress and relative stability.
Following the January 7 election, BNP advocates have sought to portray it as one-sided and the subsequent government of Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina as illegal. However, critics argue that the BNP’s decision to boycott the election granted a walkover victory to the Awami League. Counterclaims emphasize that the election would have been competitive had the BNP participated.
Despite accusations of an “unfair” election, the Biden administration and Western allies remain unconvinced, reiterating that the absence of the BNP and its allies in the electoral process does not render Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina’s fourth consecutive term illegal.
Meanwhile, commenting on the post-January 7 general election scenario and Washington’s possible steps, Michael Kugelman, director of the South Asia Institute at the Wilson Center in Washington, DC in an opinion editorial wrote: “In the coming weeks, expect a reoriented US focus away from elections and more toward promoting rights and democracy in Bangladesh more broadly—though more visa restrictions are possible for those that hindered free and fair polls. Meanwhile, the administration, impelled by commercial and strategic interests, will continue to push for deeper partnership.
“Bangladesh will remain a test case for Washington’s values-based foreign policy. But so long as it keeps bumping up against the relationship’s strategic imperatives, the experiment could grow increasingly untenable in a world order where realpolitik so often prevails”.
Replying to a question about the implications of Sheikh Hasina’s victory for US foreign policy in South Asia, Daniel Markey, senior advisor for South Asia Programs at the United States Institute of Peace told Ramisa Rob of The Daily Star, “Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina’s victory was precisely what the US government expected from a flawed process. US pre-election policies did little or nothing to deliver a free and fair election with full participation of opposition parties, and the lead-up to the elections exposed deep differences over these issues between Washington and Dhaka. This can only be seen as a setback for those who hoped – in vain – that US pressure might steer Bangladesh down a more inclusive and democratic path.
“Upcoming elections in Pakistan and India are also likely to expose the limits on Washington’s ability to champion democratic practices in large and distant societies. Overall, many US officials—including top members of the Biden administration – appreciate that a less democratically – oriented South Asia will be a more difficult region for the United States to operate. That said, the United States works with many undemocratic states around the world and, in some cases, finds shared interests – rather than values – to be a workable if not preferable foundation for cooperation”.
In my opinion, with Democratic party’s key decision making even centering its next presidential candidate is scheduled to be held in April – three months from now – where Joe Biden would be most definitely replaced by another candidate, and a cadaverous situation in Ukraine and the Middle East, for which Biden administration may not be able to skip its responsibility.
As the November 5, 2024 presidential election starts getting close, Joe Biden shall have plenty of fresher challenges, including the growing economic crisis, unemployment and above all open border issues. With these realities, Bangladesh shall not remain at Washington’s top agenda. Meanwhile, once Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina succeeds in launching a tough drive against terrorism, corruption and exorbitant prices of essentials, her government shall begin getting appreciation from the people as well as the international community.
And under such circumstances, for the Bangladesh Nationalist Party – the only viable option would be to reshuffle its policies and strategies and abandon politics of destruction and terrorism and work hard for returning to power in 2029. At the same time, BNP needs to clean its current image of an ultra-Islamist, pro-Pakistan terrorist organization. Above all – Bangladesh Nationalist Party needs to choose a new leader by sending Tarique Rahman – who according to the US administration – is “the notorious and widely feared son of former Prime Minister Khaleda Zia” and “a symbol of kleptocratic government and violent politics in Bangladesh” into pavilion.
