The political polarisation between the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) and the Awami League (AL) has caused extensive political and material damage besides diverting the attention of law enforcement agencies from pursuing the terrorists and extremists who have turned Bangladesh into a hub of jihadi terrorism.

Hartals or strikes have become an instrument of paralysing normal life. On 20 April 2006, a hartal was enforced by the Awami League (AL)-led 14-party alliance along with the Communist Party of Bangladesh (CPB) and five left parties against the killings of innocent people who were voicing concern over issues like power supply for irrigation in Kansat, police brutalities against journalists in Chittagong, hike in prices of essential commodities, etc. About 70 people were injured in the clashes and 14 members of the opposition combine were arrested by the police on charges of violent protests in different parts of Dhaka. The strike brought the country to a near standstill as educational institutions, markets, shops and many private offices remained closed. On 24 April 2006, another hartal was enforced by the AL-led coalition protesting police atrocities during the 20 April 2006 strike. About 150 people were injured and normal life and businesses suffered. Recent hartals have added to the more than 40 AL sponsored hartals since the general elections in 2001, and are still less than the number of hartals called by the BNP when the AL was in power.

The traditionally acrimonious politics is Bangladesh suffers from a paradox: while the political leadership remains committed to the values of democracy, there is almost zero tolerance of political opposition, thus allowing little space for any lawful opposition activity. The main political parties have engaged in obstructionism. Hartals have been a tactic common to both, the BNP and AL when in opposition. Hartals are a hardship on the people, generate violence, and cost millions per day in GNP. Boycott of parliament by the opposition and regular absence of parliament members are also common, making a mockery of the parliamentary democracy in Bangladesh.

This political polarisation is caused largely by the personal animosity between Sheikh Hasina and Khalida Zia. Failing to put aside personal animosity, the AL and BNP also differ in their views on the history of the creation of Bangladesh and the legacy of the leaders like Mujibur Rahman and General Zia. Both parties also fail to cooperate because they underestimate each other's political strength and each aims to establish a monopolistic rule. Mutual ill will of the two leaders has affected governance ever since parliamentary democracy was introduced in Bangladesh. In fact, the only time the two political parties came together was to oust the military regime of Gen. Ershad and pave the way for parliamentary democracy.

Relations between Sheikh Hasina and Begum Zia exemplify the feminist argument that the 'personal is political'. Unfortunately, it has not served any great feminist cause in Bangladesh and only explains the divisiveness and animosity that is characteristic of the political system. This personal and political animosity is reflected in the economic and political policies of the conflicting sides. The administration and bureaucracy in particular, is also polarised and highly corrupt owing to the nature of the political leadership. Growing religious intolerance, political and religious violence against minorities and blatant acts of terrorism against innocent civilians are also direct fallout of the political polarisation and the neglect of governance issues by the leading political parties. The hereditary nature of leadership and lack of intra-party democracy has also contributed to the political acrimony in the country.

With elections approaching in January 2007, reform in the caretaker government (CTG) and in the Election Commission (EC) as proposed by the AL has met with severe criticism from the BNP government. On the other hand, the government's efforts to contain terrorism, including suicide bombings by the misguided Islamic militants have also not been taken seriously by the opposition. All this has blocked the opportunity of a dialogue between the ruling alliance and the mainstream opposition to arrive at a minimum understanding on important and crucial national issues.

These elections are crucial for the strengthening of Bangladesh's fragile democracy as it is threatened not only by the Islamist forces who wish to create an Islamic religious theocracy in Bangladesh, but also by increasing political intolerance practiced by the government and the opposition. Unless, the political parties put the national interest before party politics, the political deadlock and continued hartals and violence will continue to hamper the political and economic development of the country and will provide the opportunity for religious extremists and terrorists to fulfil their nefarious design.

The author can be contacted at isswati@ntu.edu.sg