Due to continuous threats to Bangladesh by some extremists to separate Rangpur from Bangladesh, now it is extremely concerning that we all need to be in line with national security interests of Bangladesh all odds. National security is paramount for the peace and development of any nation. This is only achievable through the authentic practice of democracy, until an alternative system is found that can guarantee social peace and political stability.
Our experience with one-party political systems has not been favorable; it failed even in the former Soviet Union (USSR), which was the great patron and leader of such systems globally. Although countries like China and North Korea still practice one-party rule, this culture has yet to gain global popularity.
Conversely, democracy is recognized as the most popular system of governance in the world to date.Our experience in this regard has not been pleasant at all. Since the partition of 1947, instability has become a common feature of our political life. From the very beginning of its journey as an independent nation, the people of Pakistan faced political turmoil and eventually witnessed the military rule of Ayub Khan.
Although he spearheaded significant national development, his undemocratic practices ultimately gave birth to a mass uprising. He exited by handing over politics to a military government whose rash decisions eventually ensured the disintegration of Pakistan.The people of Bangladesh fought for their democratic rights, economic emancipation, and social justice in the name of Bengali nationalism. Ultimately, they succeeded in their movement and, through immense bloodshed, freed East Pakistan from Pakistani rule to create Bangladesh.
Why did the people of Bangladesh need to shed blood to emerge as an independent political entity? This remains a major question for many domestic and foreign political pundits and thinkers. Many scholars, including the prominent Bangladeshi political scientists believe that the creation of Bangladesh was the result of an Indian conspiracy.The Awami League and its leader, Sheikh Mujib, wanted the independence of Bangladesh—though he kept this entirely a secret. On the other hand, India wanted to see a weakened Pakistan and seized this as the best opportunity to break the country. Just as the East India Company conquered India through locals, India chose the path of breaking Pakistan by utilizing its own people.
Since its birth in 1971, India established itself as the sole political stakeholder in Bangladesh. India never wanted to see the development of a stable government or a democratic political culture in Bangladesh. Sheikh Mujib knew this well but failed to escape India’s hegemonic influence. For political stability and economic needs, he turned toward Russia, but the newborn ‘BAKSAL’ could provide neither stability nor economic relief; instead, he lost both his life and power simultaneously.Wrong political steps bring not only instability but also destroy social peace and harmony.
Ziaur Rahman realized this and took the right steps to establish multi-party democratic practices. Even knowing the potential negative consequences for his future, he allowed the Awami League the opportunity to begin a new political journey. While Ziaur Rahman’s government appeared quite stable, political conspiracies began, and he had to sacrifice his life at the end of May 1981.
During Ershad’s military rule, although there was extensive infrastructural and economic development, political stability remained far from reality. After 1988, political instability and mass movements escalated rapidly as all political parties in the country agreed to oust Ershad’s military government.
The fall of Ershad sparked hope for political stability among the people of Bangladesh. However, the main opposition party, the Awami League, declared that they would create such a situation for Khaleda Zia’s government that they would not be able to work in peace.
Consequently, Khaleda Zia’s government could not establish political stability and faced intense political threats from opposition parties, including Jamaat-e-Islami. Following the February 1996 elections, widespread political instability and chaos ensued, forcing the government to pass the ‘Caretaker Government Bill’ during the national election. Amidst this, Army Chief General Mohammad Nasim attempted a coup but failed.
The Awami League came to power through the elections held in June 1996. At that time, the opposition parties appeared quite mature and did not create any major political crises for the government. Sheikh Hasina’s government was relatively stable, but the people were not satisfied with the administration and returned the Nationalist forces to power. Khaleda Zia’s final term (2001-2006) faced instability from the start, suffering from the conspiracies of both internal and external forces.
General Moeen U. Ahmed, the Army Chief appointed by the BNP government, proved to be their worst adversary. Bangladesh witnessed a Civil-Military government system that was entirely unfamiliar to its people. Ultimately, through the initiatives of the United States and India, the Awami League was brought to power.
The BNP was forced to remain outside Bangladeshi politics for over 16 years. Although nationalist forces, including the BNP and Jamaat-e-Islami, tried desperately to return to the political fold, they could not succeed until the changes of July 2024. As a result, nationalist and Islamic forces are seeing a new ray of hope in their respective politics.
It is a great fortune for the people of Bangladesh that they have been freed from Sheikh Hasina’s autocratic rule and India’s hegemonic influence. Despite ideological differences, political parties have agreed to work together for the welfare of the people. Accordingly, they have signed the ‘July Charter’ and pledged to implement it through the new parliament formed following the February 2026 elections.We are eagerly waiting for the current government and the opposition to do everything possible to set a political precedent in post-revolution Bangladesh.
Respecting public opinion, the government must translate this into political reality as quickly as possible. Unnecessary delays will send a negative signal to the public, and the people will not tolerate such procrastination.
Tarique Rahman’s government appears quite fair, and he has recently clarified that the BNP will implement the ‘July Charter.’ Nevertheless, some people are spreading rumors against the current government. It is the government’s responsibility to clarify the matter through a statement; otherwise, confusion may arise, leading to unnecessary suspicion among the public and debates among political parties.For the sake of political stability, both the government and the opposition must demonstrate sufficient maturity and wisdom to build a healthy democratic culture in the future. The future political culture should be characterized by a spirit of fair political competition instead of mutual conflict and mud-slinging.
The government must provide the opposition with ample opportunity for a smooth political journey, while the opposition must extend a helping hand to the government in implementing development programs. They should engage in constructive criticism both inside and outside parliament and mobilize public opinion in the national interest.
We are pleased to learn that members of both the government and the opposition have set an example of healthy discussion regarding Begum Khaleda Zia’s contribution to the nation. They should foster a healthy culture of true democratic practice both within and outside the parliament.The government and the opposition must succeed in utilizing the changed political situation to create a stable environment for genuine democratic practice in the country. If, for any reason, they fail to realize its importance and cannot establish it in society, the nation will have to face dire consequences.
