The nation in uncharted waters

The TV talk-show guests have run out of their wits. They cannot give the nation any hope any more. The international players also have played out their cards but the nation is still very much on the brink. The only international cards that have been put on the table at this late stage are the visits of the Indian Foreign Secretary and the UN Assistant Secretary General to Dhaka early this month. However, keeping in mind that the last date for submission of nomination would be over before the visits, there should not be any reason for them to come. But then it would also not be reasonable to assume that the two are coming to validate one-party election. Therefore, perhaps there may be a ray of hope in the visits. The Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) has already hinted that the schedule dates he announced could be re-scheduled.
Nevertheless, no one is certain what is going to happen. Ruling Awami League (AL) leaders are adamant that elections would be held on schedule with or without the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP).
The BNP is equally adamant that it would not allow that to happen. Already the two sides have gone to the streets to determine which side would win. There is a great deal of media hype that the BNP would not be able to stand up to the law-enforcement agencies and the armed cadres of the ruling party in implementing its threat of stopping the elections.
The Expatriate Minister, normally one not disposed to insulting or humiliating the BNP for no reasons, made the most provocative statement about the BNP's ability to carry out its threat. He said in the media that once the law-enforcement agencies challenged the BNP activists, the latter would run away like cowards.
That statement was not only provocative but also presumptuous. The BNP's call for 48-hour blockade which was eventually extended to 72 hours, from November 26-29, and the ongoing blockade programme did not show the opposition activists running away from the streets although their top leaders were conspicuously absent for which there was a good reason.
BNP/Jamaat activists could be seen on TV footages daring to challenge the law-enforcement agencies and the ruling party's armed cadres where even one Border Guard personnel became the victim and died. The ruling party forgot about the Jamaat in ridiculing the BNP as incompetent to launch a worthwhile countrywide movement.
Outside the present context, it is the ruling party that has stated that the Jamaat is a well-trained organisation for doing the type of work it feels the BNP is incapable of carrying out. If the Jamaat were independently viewed as so dangerous, then it would only be logical to conclude that with the BNP, along with the Jamaat, fighting against the government, the Jamaat would be more dangerous because this fight would be for it a matter of life or death.
Therefore, the view of the ruling party that BNP/Jamaat would not be able to carry out its threats of stopping the elections is their way of going into denial over the dangerous prospects of an election without the BNP.  
It is true perhaps that the BNP/Jamaat would not be able to stop the government from holding the elections on January 05. The AL that claims for itself as the party more capable in forcing the government while in the opposition to accept its demands by movements on the streets was unable to stop the BNP from holding the one-party elections in 1996.
Likewise, in 1991-96, and in 2001-2006, it was unable to force the BNP government to stand down by its street movements during which it carried out the type of damages and destruction for which it and the media are now blaming the BNP/Jamaat.
The issue, therefore, is not whether the BNP/Jamaat would win on the streets or not. In fact, that is hardly an issue at all because going by past experiences, the outcome does not depend on the strength of those who take to the streets.
The street movements always ended in the victory of those on the streets because in all such movements that we have seen in our history, those who took to the streets always had the cause on their side and the people's support.
In all these movements, the governments used the state's oppressive powers to control the movements in the streets. There is, however, a completely new element, in fact a few, to add to the dangerous disturbances we are witnessing in the streets now.
One is the involvement of the ruling party in creating the disturbances. Second, is the way the present government is attempting to subdue the disturbances.
In understanding the ruling party's role, a simple example from the past should explain the issue unequivocally. The AL's 2006 street movement started because the then ruling party BNP had extended, legally, the retirement age of the judges so that elections could be held under Justice KM Hasan.
The AL took to the streets because they smelled rat in what the BNP did. Its contention was that as Justice Hasan was three decades before affiliated to the BNP, he would  manipulate the elections  for the BNP.
The fact that he had resigned from that BNP connection and for next 30 years risen through the judiciary to become the Chief Justice was of no consequence. The same AL now wants elections under party government with every branch of government required for free and fair election politicised.
This apart, the way the ruling party talks of the BNP in public and the way it has incarcerated its leaders should help readers conclude on the qualitative difference in the main reason for the two parties taking to the streets.
The way the ruling party's armed cadres are taking to the streets is another difference in the street movement. In the past, governments, even the military one of HM Ershad dealt with street movements through the law-enforcement agencies. This time politicised law-enforcement agencies are acting in tandem with the ruling party's armed cadres and thereby have given a completely new dimension to the street movement we are now witnessing.
These changes in the present street movement compared to those in the past are in a government that is much more focused in dealing with such a movement. In past street movements, no government had cornered or attempted to corner the opposition the way this government has done.
While the ruling party has announced its list of election candidates, the law-enforcement agencies, in addition to incarcerating the BNP's top leaders, has virtually put BNP's head office under siege and compelled its remaining top leaders to hide underground.
These steps by the government have also been reflected in the street movement of the present opposition as the nation has witnessed during the blockade. The opposition has targeted economic sabotage to carry forward its street agitation - something the nation witnessed only during the liberation war.
In the past, even in 2006's final days of the BNP government, the opposition AL and its allies were able and allowed to bring out huge processions in Dhaka. This time, the present government has rendered such a street agitation by the opposition BNP impossible.
The deaths and incidents on innocent people becoming victims of the agitation have also changed qualitatively for the worse. The government, supported by the media, has placed the responsibilities for the deaths and destruction squarely on the opposition, which was easy because the Jamaat, widely disliked in the media, is part of the opposition movement.
The media has largely failed to reflect on the responsibility of the government that because it has ensured that no democratic protests would be allowed, the opposition has been forced to choose the undemocratic ways to carry forward its demands.
Thus the nation is on vastly uncharted waters. The government is reacting to an opposition demand on the election issue that has the widespread support among the people and in the international community.
It is reacting in ways that have not been witnessed in the country in the past street movements. Therefore, unlike past street movements, this one will not end in the victory of those in the streets eventually as past street movements have.
It would also not end the government stream-rolling the opposition movement and returning the country to business as usual. The situation in Dhaka should not mislead the nation to make such a conclusion although even in Dhaka, it is far from business as usual. The rest of the country is burning. Unless there is a negotiated settlement, there is no reason to believe the country would see peace anytime soon.
The writer is a retired career Ambassador.
 [email protected]