A destructive lack of dialogue

If Bangladesh is to avoid a repeat of recent pre- and post-election violence, political parties and civil society need to address the root causes of unrest. If not, a democracy seen by some as fundamentally unfair or unjust will only serve to exacerbate tensions and the risk of future violent conflict.

The 5 January 2014 Bangladesh parliamentary elections were marred by political violence that saw hundreds killed in the lead up to and aftermath of elections, including 20 deaths on election day itself. The immediate and root causes of this violence are complex, but two key triggers for the current crisis stand out.

First was disagreement between the governing coalition, led by the Awami League party, and the opposition Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) and their allies, around the format of an election time government. In the past, the government of Bangladesh would hand power over to a neutral, non-political, ‘caretaker’ government under which the elections would be held. However, in 2011, the Awami League government amended the constitution so that elections would be held under the sitting government. The BNP feared that this would allow the Awami League to rig the elections and has been demanding the reinstitution of the caretaker system, refusing to take part in elections held under a political government.

The second source of tension has been the Awami League priority of moving forward with the trials of those accused of war crimes during the country’s fight for independence from Pakistan in 1971. The International Crimes Tribunal (ICT) is a domestic tribunal set up in 2008 to try war crime suspects. Internationally, concerns have been raised that this tribunal does not meet international standards, and previous violent clashes have broken out around ICT convictions in Bangladesh. The BNP and Jamaat-e-Islami (a BNP ally which has now had its registration cancelled) both oppose the ICT, claiming that it is unfair and politically motivated.

It was in this atmosphere of confrontation and violence that January’s parliamentary elections took place, with the BNP and its allies boycotting the elections. In about half of Bangladesh’s constituencies, candidates from the governing parties ran unopposed and won their seats uncontested. Jatiya Party, a former coalition partner of the Awami League, is now the main opposition – but won only 33 seats in the election, 20 of them uncontested, and holds some ministerial posts in the government as well. Low voter turn-out – a result of uncontested seats and insecurity – has further undermined the perceived legitimacy of the new government.

These tensions were exacerbated during and after the elections by violence targeted at minorities, especially religious and ethnic minorities, with houses and temples burned and people driven from their villages and even killed. Evidence so far points to minorities being targeted by political and religious extremist groups.  Some of the actions taken by law enforcement agencies in their response to violence against minorities have also raised serious concerns.

Addressing root causes

Much of the post election violence has now calmed down, but if the country is to avoid future escalations, there needs to be impartial analysis of the root causes of the unrest and long term actions taken to address them. This should be a joint effort between civil society, political parties and other key actors. One of the key causes is clear – over time the political environment in Bangladesh has become increasingly polarised creating a vacuum in Bangladeshi governance which has been taken advantage of by extremist groups resorting to violence. Historically boycotts and brinkmanship on all sides of the political spectrum have characterised Bangladeshi democracy, rather than the more constructive alternatives of engagement, consensus and compromise. 

Political leaders in Bangladesh need to take immediate action to address the current post-election situation. This means political parties must break their current stalemate, resume dialogue and work towards a compromise that can usher in political stability. It also means establishing mechanisms to ensure victims of violence are compensated, taking steps to ensure public safety (particularly that of religious and ethnic minorities), and acting to end the culture of impunity around violence against minorities, with proper investigation of these crimes.

One way to begin this longer-term shift in the wider political culture is by supporting civil society at the local level. For example, the government, political parties and international donors should support local peacebuilding initiatives jointly led by civil society organisations and local communities, which include the participation of ethnic and religious minorities, and are reflective of needs on the ground. They should also support civil society organisations to engage with relevant government structures to improve local safety and security and develop positive examples of inclusivity and cooperation.

Although divided over the legitimacy of the elections and the new Awami League government, the international community and donors should still come together to push the two main parties in Bangladesh to engage in constructive dialogue and reach a settlement that breaks the current deadlock and restarts engagement in political processes by all parties. Donors should also prioritise governance, peacebuilding and conflict sensitivity in their development aid to Bangladesh. Long term programmes to build the capacity of all actors involved in national polls on conflict sensitivity are particularly important.

Democracy can be integral to helping a society manage conflicts peacefully. However, if it does not work properly, or is seen as unfair or unjust by one or more parties, then it will only exacerbate tensions and the chances of violent conflict. Bangladesh’s political leaders mustn’t squander the development progress hard earned by individuals and local communities across the country.

Chamila Hemmathagama is Head of the Asia Programme at Saferworld.

“One way to begin this longer-term shift in the wider political culture is by supporting civil society at the local level”

Chamila Hemmathagama