Is there a case for banning Jamaat-e-Islami?

Awami League leader Md. Nasim has said something many may soon start saying: Ban Jamaat-e-Islami from Bangladesh politics. This mood is increasing in the wake of the War Crimes Tribunal and Jamaat's mounting aggressive strategy. It is easy to demand that given what Jamaat stands for in our political life but it would also be useful to ask why Jamaat-e-Islami has flourished in Bangladesh, the state whose birth it opposed violently.

* * *
Right after 1947 in Pakistan, there were several members of the Indian National Congress party including the fabled Dhiren Dutta who raised the issue of Bengali as a state language in the Pakistan parliament. They were active in Pakistan national politics and helped the bourgeoning growth of nationalism in East Pakistan. But soon after the '50s, they simply faded out and not just because the authorities were up in arms against them.

The politics of the Congress which was decidedly pro-Indian and closer to the 'Akhand Bharat' concept as an ideological construct simply had no space in Pakistan, particularly East Pakistan where a new and robust linguistic nationalism was emerging. The Congress Party was revived after 1972 as it felt better in the post-Pakistan state but was soon eclipsed by national politics which  had no time for its musty ideas, so out of place in 1972 Bangladesh. It had a faint life in the artificial arms of BKSAL but then was heard no more.

Congress died because it had no foundation to survive in Bangladesh.  Was it ever banned?

* * *
Jamaat was banned in 1972 but returned to the scene soon after 1975 in the wake of the Awami League's first departure from power. Most people blame Zia for facilitating its rebirth and it is true that this act was one of the most cynical political acts but it certainly didn't arise out of commonly held beliefs. Zia had no affection for Jamaat's politics but used their position against a potential AL backlash after coming to power. It was a product of political convenience, something that has become the primary marker of our politics.

Among many sources of inspiration to act without consequence, another one must be the imposition of BKSAL.

* * *
Those who can remember the last days of multi-party Awami League rule in 1975, they will recall the sense of collective pessimism and anxiety as the government in power failed to handle the hard-line problems that affected Bangladesh at that time. It was one of the most difficult periods in our history. Failing to handle the situation through pluralistic democratic means, the AL resorted to one party rule — whether banning all others or asking a few doesn't matter — probably as an act of desperation. It was one of the most long ranging political acts of our history that has generated a series of incidents, reactions and legacies that we have subsequently failed to cope with.

The AL wasn't a bad party as its detractors say, it was simply unable to do its task through normal politics and thought BKSAL was an easy way out. Zia also did the same seeing the situation was beyond his ability to manage. The problem was not re-entry of Jamaat or loss of democracy through BKSAL, it was about the political incompetence of our national parties to deal with major problems through acceptable means.

* * *
BNP's relationship with Jamaat has been criticised saying that the party is pro-Pakistan. BNP of course has criticised the AL saying that it is pro-Indian. The political constructions of today are largely built around these two simple and essentially deliberately misleading notions.

BNP is a party built by freedom fighters mostly and a handful of anti-AL politicians. Their calling card was not about being pro-Pakistan or pro-1971 but anti-AL which at some level became anti-Indian. So to dub them as an anti-1971 force is a dishonest but a convenient political hook for the AL. Just as it is for the BNP when it calls AL pro-Indian when all AL does is try to manage a very difficult and large neighbour.

The Awami League has a historic problem of having ruled during the early years which spawned the anti-Indian feelings in Bangladesh –1972-75 — but to call the party which led the freedom fight as pro-Indian is as cynical as calling Zia anti-Bangladesh. The AL has no reason to be pro-Indian and no record shows that but it certainly is not pro-Pakistani.

* * *
BNP says that it alone can protect Bangladesh from India but ends up doing just as much as the AL because an ideologically anti-Indian regime has no business in running Bangladesh. Its anti-Indian stance is more about rhetoric and going by analysis of trade and other indicators, policies change little when regimes change in Dhaka.  Both the parties have the same policy more or less because there is barely any difference between the two. Policy stabilities also come from the bureaucracy too that is inter-regime and not by politicians who come in and go every few years.

Being pro or anti-Indian and hence pro or anti-Pakistani is all about Bangladesh's feeble brand of politics which can respond to broad slogans of misconstrued jingoism but hardly makes any national policy or practical sense. For populism's sake, India is to the AL what Pakistan is to the BNP. No evidence that either of the two countries mentioned care about who is what in Bangladesh.

The way our politics is structured, this international loyalty based national political platform was inevitable since there isn't any politics based on concrete ideas or vision. India and Pakistan rivalry have decided politics in Bangladesh because Bangladesh political parties have yet to evolve any substantive content on their own.

* * *
Jamaat also has had some advantages such as never being in full power and has therefore been spared the reputation of being corrupt. Since both our ruling parties have produced the largest pool of corrupt people, which even runs to inter-generational relationships, most people have come to look upon politics as an opportunity for leaders to make money, not serve the people.

Even during the last innings when BNP tagged Jamaat along to reach power and its leaders including Zia's children and other family members displayed amazing capacity for monetary corruption, none were reported against the two Jamaat ministers. There were some fringe allegations but not much compared to the almost single minded corruption of the BNP politicians. This has helped Jamaat-e-Islami sustain public confidence that while Jamaat politics may be all wrong, the people are clean.

Can't say that about the AL and the BNP, can we?

* * *
BNP doesn't like Jamaat but doesn't want to ban them for political expediency as it helps them in their political struggle against the AL who wants to ban them as it helps the BNP but doesn't know how to. To both of them, Jamaat's past crimes are not as important as their present role. The AL's not too confident attempt to try the Jamaat leaders fills many with the dread of failure. To put it mildly, the confidence in the War Crimes Tribunal is missing. One hopes that the AL knows what it is doing as the trial dates come closer.

But face it, in all the times that they had in 40 years past, little time was spent in collecting evidence of war crimes  something the AL was capable of doing. Is it more about the people of Bangladesh or about tying Jamaat down to hurt the BNP?

* * *
Jamaat supported Pakistan and Pakistan like all occupiers was a murderous one. Jamaat supported a state that fought Bangladesh to prevent its birth. There is no space to negotiate this historical fact. Jamaat exists in Bangladesh to support that same ideology that it had in 1971 with its band of dedicated workers who took to the streets recently to display their rage. Jamaat has no place in Bangladesh and deserves to be banned but one wonders if there is a legal case against them for banning. If it did we have to ask why it has not been banned in all these years.

But Jamaat is here, safe and sound. It is here because our political parties are unable to think beyond partisanship and become national.  Jamaatis will never accept Bangladesh, but then do the big parties — AL and the BNP – put Bangladesh before their own interests?

————————————————-
Afsan Chowdhury is a Consulting Editor of bdnews24.com.