Bangladesh Falls Apart

[Soms]

The main think BNP would need to do is, if comes in power again, use media media and media to expose all the crimes of BAL against BD to the people.

The whole premise boils down to this:
Will BNP (in its current form) ever come to power?

Al is trying its best to break the opposition wherever it can. They still have a huge upper hand.
I didn't get the logic behind JEI shifting its Hartal to Thursday from Monday.
Iztema Munazat was wrapped up at 10:00 AM...so that was not an impediment.

I'm pretty sure JEI would NOT postpone its agitation for the Nizami ruling just coz of Sarawsati Pooja of Hindu's!!

 

[Badbadman]

Bangladesh is "Made by India" product, it will last. Bengalis had lifetime guarantee from India in 1971. Any defects will be fixed by India.

 

[Roybot]

A military coup maybe, a civil war, not a chance. But then again, given that the Bangladesh Military is just an Indian stooge(if pdf Bangladeshis are to believed), a military coup also seems impossible. So status quo it is then.

 

[janon]

A military coup maybe, a civil war, not a chance. But then again, given that the Bangladesh Military is just an Indian stooge(if pdf Bangladeshis are to believed), a military coup also seems impossible. So status quo it is then.

It's going to be nothing but another 5 years of governance by the party that won the election. Neither the military nor anybody else has any interest in destabilizing the country - the only Bangladeshis who want that are here on PDF. Jamati terrorists will get the noose one after the other, and their acolytes on PDF will bitch and complain uselessly about evil secularists and India and RAW and whatnot. Next time if BNP doesn't boycott the elections, they may have a shot.

No coups, no civil wars, no revolution, no ''falling apart'' - just another boring 5 year period. That's the brutal and harsh truth.

 

[TopCat]

It's going to be nothing but another 5 years of governance by the party that on the election. Neither the military nor anybody else has any interest in destabilizing the country - the only Bangladeshis who want that are here on PDF. Jamati terrorists will get the noose one after the other, and their acolytes on PDF will bitch and complain uselessly about evil secularists and India and RAW and whatnot. Next time if BNP doesn't boycott the elections, they may have a shot.

No coups, no civil wars, no revolution, no ''falling apart'' - just another boring 5 year period. That's the brutal and harsh truth.

There is always a anti incumbent sentiment in Bangladesh. The situation will be very bad within a year and BNP just waiting for it.

 

[janon]

There is always a anti incumbent sentiment in Bangladesh. The situation will be very bad within a year and BNP just waiting for it.

There is always anti incumbency everywhere in the world. That's the nature of politics. The best thing BNP can do to take advantage of it is competing in the elections and removing AL from power, if they are confident enough. Other than that, they don't stand a chance of coming to power.

There is also rage against the jamati terrorists and the fact that Khaleda Zia is in an unholy alliance with them, but those sentiments don't get reflected on PDF.

 

[livingdead]

Islamists don't like secularism. Treating everybody equally irrespective of their faith, the government and laws being religion-neutral, these niceties are anathema to them. Besides, nobody in the arab world likes secularism, so the wannabe arabs don't want any of that either.

they will be the first to cry human rights and secularism in countries they are in minority.

 

[janon]

they will be the first to cry human rights and secularism in countries they are in minority.

Of course. And everybody who rails against secularism here are curiously living in secular countries that give them the freedom to rail against secuarism.

What is so difficult to understand - secularism simply means that all religions will be treated equally, and that no religion can be imposed by force. Some people know in their hearts that under such conditions, their religion may not stand much of a chance - they need the threat of force to impose it - so they fear secularism, and want the coercive powers of govt on their side.

 

[TopCat]

There is always anti incumbency everywhere in the world. That's the nature of politics. The best thing BNP can do to take advantage of it is competing in the elections and removing AL from power, if they are confident enough. Other than that, they don't stand a chance of coming to power.

There is also rage against the jamati terrorists and the fact that Khaleda Zia is in an unholy alliance with them, but those sentiments don't get reflected on PDF.

You have no idea how politicized our administration and police forces are. In the last 20 years only the political cadres were recruited in the govt jobs and they are in the key position. These govt officials will make sure that AL will come back to power unless there is a caretaker govt. Now its up to BNP whether they will take part in the election and take a chance or wait for the people's movement to oust AL from power.

they will be the first to cry human rights and secularism in countries they are in minority.

I never heard Muslim cry for secularism where they were minority. Equal rights or human rights is a complete different subject than secularism and are equally applicable in any muslim non secular country

 

[janon]

I never heard Muslim cry for secularism where they were minority. Equal rights or human rights is a complete different subject than secularism and are equally applicable in any muslim non secular country

No they are not. You think Saudi Arabia or Pakistan or other muslim countries have equal rights for all? You thin all religions are treated equally in non secular countries? No, secular by definition means treating all religions equally, and non secular means the opposite.

You have no idea how politicized our administration and police forces are. In the last 20 years only the political cadres were recruited in the govt jobs and they are in the key position. These govt officials will make sure that AL will come back to power unless there is a caretaker govt. Now its up to BNP whether they will take part in the election and take a chance or wait for the people's movement to oust AL from power.

A people's movement can do very little, unless the police and armed forces either side with them, or at least stay away from everything. Otherwise most nations can crush any people's movement, with the army and police at their disposal.

The BNP should have set its house in order as well. If they had maintained a clean image, then people would have found it easier to try and topple the govt, because they would know that a better alternative exists. But as things stand, BNP is in bed with dubious, nefarious elements, and do nothave a moral high ground either. So people have no incentive to invest their time, energy, resources and safety to overthrow one bad party with another bad party.

 

[TopCat]

No they are not. You think Saudi Arabia or Pakistan or other muslim countries have equal rights for all? You thin all religions are treated equally in non secular countries? No, secular by definition means treating all religions equally, and non secular means the opposite.

A lot of muslim country have better records than mother India. I said equal rights are applicable in any non secular Muslim country not that all countries already did.

Secular by definition is separation of Religion from State affairs, not equal treatment. It is far more than equal treatment.

A people's movement can do very little, unless the police and armed forces either side with them, or at least stay away from everything. Otherwise most nations can crush any people's movement, with the army and police at their disposal.

The BNP should have set its house in order as well. If they had maintained a clean image, then people would have found it easier to try and topple the govt, because they would know that a better alternative exists. But as things stand, BNP is in bed with dubious, nefarious elements, and do nothave a moral high ground either. So people have no incentive to invest their time, energy, resources and safety to overthrow one bad party with another bad party.

AL moved away from people long time ago. If a neutral election takes place now even JEI will win more seats than AL

 

[livingdead]

A lot of muslim country have better records than mother India. I said equal rights are applicable in any non secular Muslim country not that all countries already did.

Secular by definition is separation of Religion from State affairs, not equal treatment. It is far more than equal treatment.



AL moved away from people long time ago. If a neutral election takes place now even JEI will win more seats than AL

in theory, you are right. Theoritically its possible to be non secular but treat your citizen as euals. Can you give names few countries that have managed to do that?

 

[janon]

A lot of muslim country have better records than mother India. I said equal rights are applicable in any non secular Muslim country not that all countries already did.

Secular by definition is separation of Religion from State affairs, not equal treatment. It is far more than equal treatment.

That depends on which country's definition you go by. In the USA, secularism is interpreted as strict separation of church and state, according to the first amendment. The govt cannot promote or inhibit any religion. In India and many other place, it means equal treatment of all religions. So the Indian govt can subsidize haj pilgrims with taxpayers money, as long as it also subsidizes other religious pilgrimages.

Equal rights, with respect to religious beliefs - no, in non secular countries there is no equal rights for religious beliefs. For example, in Saudi Arabia nobody can build a temple or church. But in secular countries, anybody can build any house of worship to any religion. In Pakistan, no law can be passed that violates the quran. No such provision exists for the vedas or talmud. I can give examples all day. Only in secular countries are people's religious beliefs treated equally by the state. Equal rights for RELIGIOUS BELIEFS, not human rights in general.

 

[dray]

Bangladesh Falls Apart
BY Kathryn Alexeeff
The political situation in Bangladesh has gone from bad to worse. In the months leading up to national elections, hundreds were killed in political violence, and leaders of opposition political parties were jailed, put under house arrest, or forced to flee the country. With the opposition Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) boycotting elections in January and voter turnout as low as 20 percent, the electoral outcome is widely considered illegitimate.

While Bangladesh has never been the epitome of democracy, the dubious elections and ongoing violence have pushed the country to the brink of disaster. The unstable political situation threatens Bangladesh's economy, already under fire due to extraordinarily low wages and unsafe factories.

With no signs of the violence stopping or stability returning, Bangladesh seems likely to continue to spiral downward in 2014, headed towards another military coup or full-blown civil war.

The blame for the current situation can be laid squarely on the ongoing political rivalry between Khaleda Zia and Sheikh Hasina, often called the "two ladies." Zia and Hasina have traded off ruling Bangladesh for the past 20 years. Each is in control of one of the country's two largest political parties, with Hasina in charge of the Awami League and Zia in charge of the BNP. They are the most powerful political figures in Bangladesh, and their bitter rivalry has led the country to the brink of disaster.

Given their past, it is highly unlikely that the two ladies will ever reach a peaceful political compromise. They have ignored multiple opportunities to find middle ground over the past few months, instead choosing to hurl recriminations at each other. Neither was willing to budge an inch before the election, even though doing so could have helped stop violence from tearing the country apart. Their actions have proven that winning is more important to them than stopping the violence or governing Bangladesh.

Bangladesh has few good options in its future. Since the elections, Hasina has refused to engage in discussions with the opposition as long as they continue to support unrest. Because "unrest" can be defined as anything from peaceful protests to an outright terrorist attack, it is unlikely that Hasina will engage in talks with the opposition in the near future. She has little reason to, since she already has what she wants: another term in office with the continued support of India and only muted condemnation from the rest of world.

Even so, one-party rule under the Awami League is unlikely to stabilize anytime soon. Opposition violence continues, and the BNP shows no signs of backing down. Stable one-party rule cannot begin until the opposition has been sufficiently repressed so that they no longer pose a threat - and the BNP and other opposition parties are far from broken yet.
Furthermore, Hasina's popular backing is beginning to crumble, as low voter turnout in the last election indicates. Voter turnout of only 20-30 percent does not mean the majority of the population opposes Hasina per se; however, it does indicate that the backbone of her popular support is small. A largely indifferent population and a militant opposition are a shaky basis for an autocracy. Such a regime would need consistent and unwavering military and police backing, something on which Hasina cannot count.

Given these dynamics, the military may yet step in and take control in a coup. The military has taken control from civilian governments before, most recently in 2007, when Bangladesh faced a similar situation. Fraudulent elections, that time by the BNP, and political violence led the military to wrest control from civilian leaders and declare a state of emergency.

As in 2007, however, a military coup today would suppress dissention and violence for short time, at most. It would not be able to address the underlying causes of the current crisis: the feud between Zia and Hasina, as well as the mentality that electoral victory means the winner prosecutes the loser. The country is just as polarized now as it was six years ago, if not more.
In the worst scenario, the political violence would continue to escalate until Bangladesh descends into civil war. The progression might be similar to the current Syrian civil war, in which protests morphed into armed opposition and the development of militant groups, before gaining the momentum to become a full-fledged war.

Bangladesh is currently between the first and second stages: The government is cracking down on ongoing protests, but it is unclear how far the opposition has moved towards militancy. One of the main opposition groups, Islamist Jamaat-e-Islami, has been launching attacks against the Hindu minority. While these attacks are not directed at the government, they have a political dimension, since Bangladesh's Hindus are more likely to support the secular Awami League.

The attacks are also a clear indication of Bangladesh's crumbling domestic security - a product of a growing security vacuum. Civil wars are rarely a simple conflict between government and opposition. They are also opportunities to persecute minorities, often because the powers that are nominally in charge are stretched too thin to offer protection.
Two bad options
Amid the current turmoil, Hasina's grip on power seems unlikely to last. If opposition protests continue, the country will be left with two bad options.

One is a military coup, which would suppress political tensions but not resolve them. The parties' opposing visions of Bangladesh remain even deeper than the Zia-Hasina feud: The BNP defines Bangladesh primarily as an Islamic nation, while the Awami League backs a secular state based on Bengali ethnicity. Since it would not begin to resolve that tension, a military coup would likely land Bangladesh in a similar political situation in just a few more years.

The other option -- civil war -- would come at a catastrophic cost, potentially including hundreds of thousands of deaths, a massive refugee influx into India, and the ethnic cleansing of Bangladesh's Hindu population.
Regardless of which direction the country takes, 2014 looks likely to be a very bad year for Bangladesh.Bangladesh Falls Apart

Don't worry, BAL will put it back together, all the bits & pieces.

 

[DarkPrince]

so much for your democracy and independence .

That depends on which country's definition you go by. In the USA, secularism is interpreted as strict separation of church and state, according to the first amendment. The govt cannot promote or inhibit any religion. In India and many other place, it means equal treatment of all religions. So the Indian govt can subsidize haj pilgrims with taxpayers money, as long as it also subsidizes other religious pilgrimages.

Equal rights, with respect to religious beliefs - no, in non secular countries there is no equal rights for religious beliefs. For example, in Saudi Arabia nobody can build a temple or church. But in secular countries, anybody can build any house of worship to any religion. In Pakistan, no law can be passed that violates the quran. No such provision exists for the vedas or talmud. I can give examples all day. Only in secular countries are people's religious beliefs treated equally by the state. Equal rights for RELIGIOUS BELIEFS, not human rights in general.

all day long you indian cry about modi. now you guys gonna teach us secularism