Third force in Bangla-politics

New Political School Would Be Meaningful ‘THIRD FORCE’ Quader Chowdhury

Talks about ‘third force’ are almost everywhere now in Bangladesh (BD). In the post-WW-II situation, France experienced such ‘third force’ exercises while that nation was in economic crisis, and wrangling with its former colony VietNam which had been in its Independence struggle against France. Then a Third Force was formed during the May 1947 crisis, as a result of the Communists’ refusal to continue their support for the French colonial re-conquest of Vietnam abiding by the Republican policy. ‘Third Force’ opposed both to the French Communist Party (PCF) and the De Gaullist movement. Since 1977, Bangladesh (BD) politics had been having around hundred parties registered. Concurrently, its polarization been seemingly stabilized with two major parties – Awami League (AL) and BNP. Both have been alternatively running the governments for at least two decades. For many reasons, the vast majority populations today are frustrated and angry at such parties for their seriously bad performances and failures. From the polito-economic and polito-philosophic view point, the global politics was once categorized into three ideological worlds – giant capitalist states known as the ‘first world’, communist nations as ‘second worlds’ and the rest – poor colonial undeveloped nations as ‘third world’ in the pre-‘90s era. Such categorization was based on economic nature, political ideology, and character of the administration of the concerned nation. Today, BD have the A_L in the power while BNP in the opposition. Given those guidelines, can we say that ruling A_L is the ‘first force’; BNP is the ‘second force’, so the question of ‘third force’- that expected to be better- could comes up? No. But, why? Fundamentally, A_L, BNP and JP are similar in ideology, in practice and in character, except for the issue of Bengali/Bangladeshi arguments. Ideologically, they are closed to each-other and they represent native growing capitalists and foreign giant capitalists, at home. All parties are run by the authoritarian personnel with own ‘holy family’ vice and hype. That’s why; the JP was never seen as the ‘third force’ between A_L and BNP since its birth. Now, the question of second force- who are they, ideology wise? Leftists or Islamists? They are individually not so strong players yet in the power-game. And there is no pure social democratic party yet. So, when talk about ‘third force’ to form in BD politics, do the mass citizens mean/expect the replacement of ‘Mrs. Bad’ with ‘Mr Worst’- Or, the next version of BNP/JP/A_L to materialize some one else’s personal dream, again? No. Never. The influence of these two famous families – Bangobondhu Mujib and president Zia is deep and strong in our backward society. So, it is tough to form an alternative stream out-side/parallel to /against the realm of these family images at this moment. But reforming/reshuffling internal leadership at the top level of each party– BNP/AL/JP by generating and exerting massive force of party councilors/grass root workers to choose dynamic new leadership panel would be more effective/viable option. In this case, the mid-level leaders have to be united for this single purpose, no matter- the top boss how reacts to-. It might be easier/wiser than forming a new organization calling it third force. Sher-e-Bangla, ex-Muslim Leaguer (M-L) successfully built Krishok Proja Party as the alternative party to the Pakistan M-L for the poor East Bengal; then again, the Krishok Sramyk Party. Mawlana Bhashanee also successfully formed and run the Awami League, based on Bangalee nationalism and democracy, as alternative to the Pakistan M-L and religion based parties. A decade later, Bhashanee again formed the National Awami Party (NAP), based on nationalism and internationalism/communism as the ‘third force’ besides the Pakistan M-L and A_L. In all those cases, their mountain like personality was the main force, while their party ideology, progressive programs, character and dynamic leadership were the vital ingredients for their historic roles played. Later, a few gentleman type renowned professionals like Dr. Kamal, Dr. Yunus and Dr. B.Chowdhury failed to form any alternative party against any mainstream party as they were in shortage of those qualities. But, exceptions were President Ayub Khan, President Zia, and President Ershad who formed own party in their own era using the state money, their private/government musclemen, and administrations that later consolidated their dictatorial leaderships in their power politics. The South Asia contemporarily goes through a fashion of ‘alliance governments’ led by one of the local two mainstream parties. The Congress and the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) in India, the Pakistan Peoples’ Party (PPP) and Muslim League (Nawaz) in Pakistan, and the Sri-Lankan Freedom Party (SLFP) and the United National Party (UNP) in Sri Lanka; plus Nepal/Burma have also tilted toward the two-party system with local ‘alternative forces’ being emerged. In Pakistan, former Cricket legend, Imran Khan -Tehreek-e-Insaf –PTI- has been touting for about ten years to stand high as an alternative to the two mainstream political parties – PPP and ML (N), but still staggering though growing slowly. In recent Burma, the educated young urban activists unofficially formed a coalition that was branded as the ‘third force’ around their 2010 national election. A new political school emerged there, calling for a new path in bringing about democracy in the light of 2010 new constitution. Burmese Third Force components- mostly moderate in nature- are seen as different from the Suu Kyi’s party- NLD in their approach. While in India, ending the fasting in the famous anti-corruption movement, the ‘Team Anna Hazara’ committed itself to creating an alternative political ‘third force’ in the mid-2012. The support for Anna team was not based on any grassroots mobilization. Besides, a good deal of the support for the anti-corruption movement may not translate into support for alternative politics. Though, many prominent Indian personalities have urged him to form a new political platform. His harsh critics up front accuse that he tactfully talks for the BJP. So far seeming Anna tends to back off from that point of forming any new alternative platform. So, the mountain like personal image, new ideology, firm vision, networking with new young generation and the dynamic leadership etc are the key ingredients, among other resources to successfully form/run either a ‘third force’ or an ‘alternative force’. Even further, for say, a big budget and personal security forces might also be needed to ensure success. No doubt that today people desperately search for alternative leadership in BD. Rights and basic needs of the weak citizens’ that have not being delivered should to be voiced loudly. And those obviously would be encoded in the social-democrat ideology that today is seen in many European/ Scandinavian societies- where the economy is state-control free, but most basic services to all citizens are guaranteed/ delivered by the government. Such political line would make a fundamental distinction to the same of the BNP/A_L/JP in Bangladesh. Such forces can be called as the actual ‘alternative/third’ force. If this is seen as not feasible immediately, so then, fighting for better inner party culture and to have qualified leadership in each major party would be more realistic and feasible. The new generation voters and the medias have to come forward to lend helping hands in such corrective initiatives.

# ( Quader Chowdhruy is an Accountant and a freelance columnist based in Montreal. PUBLISHED BD. National daily Newspaper, Sept 2012.)