Strategically Speaking
Looking back at 2007
The country had to weather many storms since the start of 2007, both natural and political. We are, regrettably, still in the process of picking up the pieces from both, and unless we play our cards right weathering the political storm may prove to be very difficult.
The months since October 2006 had been devoid of politics and without a democratic government. However, it would not be wrong to suggest that our minds had been fully occupied with anything but politics, and that it has been any less interesting than it would have otherwise been under a democratic government and a politically charged environment that the people had been held hostage to the past 5 years.
It has been less violent though, with no political hartals and the attendant collapse of normal public life.
The transition to 2007 was extremely painful, not only because of the very belligerent attitude of the two major parties towards each other that cost us very dearly in terms of life and property, perhaps equally painful has been the subversion of politics and failure to ensure continuity of the democratic process.
The blame for this must be shared by both the major parties, but the biggest contributory factor that created the political uncertainty has been the attempt by the then ruling party to ensure election victory at any cost.
Thus, a pliant serving judge of the appellate division was illegally appointed head of one of the most important democratic institutions of the country -- the Election Commission. The media's call to rescind the appointment has been vindicated by the recent ruling on the matter by the highest court.
One wishes that the judgment on the matter had come sooner. It is the systematic distortion of the institution to suit the blueprint of the ruling party that had destroyed its credentials. And all the problems that followed stemmed from the general distrust of the perceived role of the EC.
The shenanigans resorted to in compelling a situation that led to the self-appointment of the president as the chief advisor to the first caretaker government need restating, if only to remind us that a modicum of sagacity by rising above partisan politics by the honourable president would have averted the situation that we are facing now.
What the events demonstrated was the shameful contest for power; while one party was willing to go to any lengths to hold on to power the other would stop at nothing to prevent that from happening.
The consequent uncertainty led to a unique and unforeseen situation, but whose inevitability could not be averted. We had the luxury of not one but two caretaker governments.
The second was hailed by, and enjoyed the support of, the general mass. And in the new dispensation the armed forces played a substantive role, a role that had the support of the public too. And the only reason that the new dispensation engendered popular support was the great expectation of the people, that it would deliver them from a regime of destructive and ineffective politics.
And that is why the immediate measures undertaken by the caretaker government to bring in reforms and indeed revive public credibility and trust in the democratic institutions found a positive resonance in the public mind.
Expectations were raised with the re-manning of the EC and re-invigoration of the ACC. The drive against corruption and the commitment of the CTG to bring in political reforms pointed towards a new trend in politics and a reformed polity in Bangladesh.
But that was very well and good as far as the intentions of the CTG went. There has been, regrettably, very little of substance that the government has been able to deliver in the nearly one year it has been in office. One could, perhaps, be so bold as to suggest that the public support graph for the CTG has taken a downward turn. This calls for some retrospection.
It was very clear at the outset that the new government was caught between two compulsions that were complementary towards achieving the goal of return to good democratic governance.
The compulsion of having an election as early as possible was predicated on the popular demand of not going back to the politics of the past.
There can be little argument about the aim of achieving clean politics by bringing reform of politics and of the political parties. However, the objectives and the method of reaching it have, at best, been hasty and, at worst, flawed. The handling of the issue of "exit/entry" out of and into the country of the leaders of the two parties is a case in point.
We had, through these columns, several times in the past pointed to the pitfalls of taking too many things on the plate and opening too many fronts that might prove unmanageable and eventually turn hostile. That has come true, regrettably.
The political parties have come round to acknowledging the need and the benefits of reforms but the reform of the political parties must come from within, although the government can on its own introduce measures that would indirectly compel party reform.
If the political front saw a patchy performance, in the economic front, the unbridled rise in prices of essentials did not help the cause of the caretaker government. But the remarkable thing was that the reaction of the people was far from hostile. They were willing to give a chance to the CTG to sort out the economic and business sector and go after the syndicates.
What was perhaps not foreseen was the cumulative effect of the government drive against corruption, and the political reforms, on the country's overall socio-economic condition.
The reality is that while politics has become as much a matter of business it has not been able to come out of the control of the businessmen. The nexus is only but natural, needed for both to not only survive but also flourish.
What has raised queries in the public mind is the selective and personality oriented approach to political reforms. We had, in these columns in the recent past, emphasised on the fact that reforms and changes attain credibility only if they are attended by honest intentions. A caretaker government cannot afford to have the rationale that motivates its policies become questionable.
The government is aware of this situation, and has taken some steps to restore it. One of the mechanisms it is trying to evolve is the truth commission, of which there is too much speculation and too little substance available to post any worthwhile critique.
But we had expressed our reservations regarding affording opportunity to the jailed politicians and businessmen, and most of them are two-in-one, to pronounce simply mea culpa to atone for their crimes. Who will verify whether what they are stating is true?
And there is also the better business forum that will allow our businessmen to ply their business with fewer hindrances or let. What does it mean for the poor consumers, less costly products? One hopes so, but can't help wondering whether that will be the case.
There is always the danger in a dispensation such as this for people in the government to get very used to their jobs. The government, one hopes, is alive to the pitfalls of the prolonged stay of an unelected regime, as well as a prolonged political void.
It can ill-afford to lose public trust and support. However, it cannot waver in its plan for political reforms as well as cleansing the country of corruption, either.
We cannot expect to have a situation at the end of 2008 that, in essence, will not be better than what was obtaining when the current CTG took over the reins of the state.
The author is Editor, Defence & Strategic Affairs, The Daily Star.
For all latest news, follow The Daily Star's Google News channel.
Comments