Building democracy is a tough proposition. You don’t build it when it is men who have defended undemocratic acts in the past try to convince you that they are the instruments for a restoration of political pluralism. Democracy is not to be had from the likes of those who have spotted, falsely, in their icons the roots of popular rule.
And yet these and other constraints have consistently impeded the flowering of democracy in Bangladesh. When today the political opposition demands that free and fair elections be held in the country, that the rule of law be upheld, that the will of the people be respected, you do not disagree with it.
That is what democracy is all about.
But when the opposition would have us know that the road to democracy lies through shutting off all avenues to the nation’s capital, through preventing citizens from exercising freedom of movement, you are concerned. What guarantee is there that if those who try isolating Dhaka from the rest of the country and then return to power will ensure that citizens will have a happy time enjoying their natural right of movement across the country?
The people of Bangladesh are aware of history, of the ceaseless struggle waged by their preceding generations in defence of democratic rights in the 1960s. They do not forget the compulsions, generated by an organized genocide conducted by an alien army, which led us into an armed struggle for liberation.
They remember all too well the leadership of Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman and the Mujibnagar government in that epic movement for freedom back in the early 1970s. They have not forgotten the sustained struggle put up by the political parties, the Awami League and the Bangladesh Nationalist Party, in the movement to bring down the Ershad illegitimacy through the 1980s and all the way to the end of 1990.
That is the legacy this nation is heir to. And there is more. This nation, having suffered through 21 years of a denial of history, of an airbrushing of the national leadership out of the national narrative, of those dark moments when assassins moved around with impunity and without the state daring or willing to bring them to justice, brought about a restoration of decency and the rule of law in June 1996. This is the heritage we are part of, the tradition we have proudly called our own.
Certainly in these past many years there have been the lapses, the mistakes that have been made. Draconian laws, their application in random manner, have caused worries to arise in us. The manner in which elections have been held, the ways in which parliamentarians have been elected to office have not made us happy. There are all the complaints we as citizens have had about governance in these past many years.
And while we raise those complaints, we do not ignore the strides the country has made on the watch of the government which administers the country today. No, we will not offer a paean to those who govern at this point in time, but we will register our appreciation for the many positive ways in which they have projected Bangladesh before the world.
And one appreciates the desire of the opposition to have unfettered democracy operate in the country. But one is gravely concerned that those who call for democracy today are not willing to inform us that they have reformed themselves over the issue of history, that they are willing to turn a new page where their interpretation of national history is concerned. A nation deprived of historical truth is damned to perdition.
And we as a people are clearly unwilling to return to a time when our history will be snatched from us once again and anti-history reign supreme over us. The opposition promises what it calls a restoration of democracy, but it remains loyal to the darkness which befell Bangladesh on a November morning 48 years ago. It is a contradiction which does not bode well for the country.
Democracy is not guaranteed when individuals enamoured of the opposition look to the day when the exiled child of a late dictator and his spouse will provide leadership to this country. And what complaints does one have about this exiled political individual? Simply this -- that his lack of respect for the nation’s liberation leaders is not the base on which he can or should be conducting politics.
It then becomes the role of opposition intellectuals to be extra careful about singing praises of a person whose understanding of history is gravely flawed or deliberately misleading. Political parties which mean to ensure the welfare of nations must first begin by having at their leadership men and women who respect history, who refrain from taking every opportunity to humiliate the pioneers who ensured the emergence of this republic.
Guarantees of democracy will not be there when ageing intellectuals, viscerally opposed to the Awami League, go out on a limb to insist that Bangabandhu concluded his historic March 7 speech through raising a “Joy Pakistan” slogan at the end. These men were not there at that million-strong Race Course rally; they did not hear Bangabandhu.
And yet today, driven by their animus against the Awami League, they would offer the proposition that pro-Mujib employees of Dhaka Radio removed that “reference to Joy Pakistan” before broadcasting the speech on the morning of March 8, 1971 (the Tikka Khan military administration had forbidden a live broadcast of the speech the previous day).
And, yes, there is that one other little point about democracy. There are opposition politicians, in alliance with their friends in other parties, who are intent on overthrowing the government as a means of bringing about democracy in the country. That is language which militates against democracy. Any movement in defence of popular rights through proper elections taking place in any country abjures the use of language which reeks of violence.
You do not inspire people into democracy through demanding that those in office be thrown into the sea or be driven out of power through an exercise of organised violence. You call for elections, which is fine. Let the elections be the arbiter of the nation’s political future. Do not demand that a government which has not come into office through seizing power by force of arms be ousted by undemocratic means.
At the end of the day, this country is in need of a government which upholds democracy through adherence to the values which underscored the national struggle for freedom more than a half century ago. This nation needs to be reassured that its history will remain safe in the hands of those who govern, that the rule of law will define our lives as citizens, that corruption will be sternly and swiftly dealt with, that the grassroots will take precedence in all political considerations, that the institutions of the republic will serve not those who wield power but serve only the republic.
Democracy, in that ideal sense of the meaning, takes ages to acquire meaningful substance. It is a process which envisages the presence of mature politicians across the political divide. It calls for political leaders to reach out to an entire nation. It is that opportunity which means to have politicians graduate, through an exercise of wisdom touched with experience, into statesmen.
One final point. Democracy is not to be assured through the intervention or interference of those global powers which in our times have pushed Iraq, Libya, and Afghanistan to ruin, and have left those nations in a mess. Democracy must be home-grown, with our own values powering its growth and expansion.
Syed Badrul Ahsan is Consultant Editor, Dhaka Tribune.
