Politics of hatred

Bangladesh Prime Minister Khaleda Zia fancies herself playing the role of a mediator between Indian Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee and Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf. She tried to convey the impression that she was “ideally suited for it,” when she talked to me at Dhaka a few days before the SAARC summit. Apparently, she did not succeed at Kathmandu although she met both of them there. It is significant that she made no reference to the attack on the Indian Parliament but mentioned the September 11 carnage in her prepared speech at the summit.

Still I found Khaleda less anti-India than in the days when she was pri-me minister earlier. Most of her observations at that time would be laced with her anti-India bias. She assured me a year ago, when she was in the wilderness that she would not indulge in anti-India rhetoric if she returned to power. That probably explains why she did not make India an issue in the last election, which despite rigging, went convincingly in her favour. Khaleda seems to have matured over the years. Her words are now measured and her remarks show that she has thought things out. She remains unruffled even when provocative questions are put to her. Yet, she has an imperious flourish in the way she talks or postures herself on domestic issues. Her predecessor Sheikh Hasina continued to retain the common touch during her tenure as prime minister even though she became impatient and somewhat authoritarian in the latter half of her office.

“I am not going to allow any nuisance this time,” said Khaleda. Her hatred for Hasina still remains implacable. Khaleda had in mind Hasina’s announcement that the Awami League, which Hasina heads, would initiate a public agitation to demand fresh polls. Khaleda said “they organised a hartal during the holy month of Ramadan but it was a big flop.” She seemed to bring in the word ‘holy’ to underline her religious fervour, which she is trying to revive in a country that has been settling to a secular ethos in the past few years. She has already visited Mecca twice, the first time she delayed even the formation of her cabinet to offer her thanks at the holy shrine. I was struck by the photos of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman still hanging on the wall of the waiting room adjacent to the prime minister’s office. The credit for this goes to her able law minister who reportedly pointed out to her at a cabinet meeting that there was a law, enacted by the Hasina government, to punish those who pulled down Mujib’s pictures from government offices or public places. There may be an amendment to the law so that the photos of Mujib and Khaleda’s husband, Zia-ur Rahman, can be displayed together. In the meanwhile, she has ordered the removal of Mujib’s picture from Bangladesh currency notes.

Khaleda has also stopped official holidays on Mujib’s birthday and the day on which he was assassinated. I asked her, why? First she tried to rationalise the order on the grounds that there were too many holidays in her country. But then she was frank enough to justify her action by saying that they (the Hasina government) had cancelled the holiday on September 7. It was the day when her husband took over the charge of Bangladesh after a mutiny by army jawans. Khaleda had no convincing defence when I asked her about the killing and looting of Hindus in the wake of the Bangladesh Nationalist Party’s (BNP) victory. Her explanation was that it happened mostly at the time when the caretaker government was in power. The other argument she advanced was that it was the “doing of the Awami League,” which expected the Hindus to vote for it but “pounced upon them” when it found they had voted for the BNP. “You can ask the Hindus,” she said. “I shall give you their names.” When she saw that I looked unconvinced, she said that she had ordered a judicial inquiry. She went on in the same vein to put the blame on the Aw- ami League. (The Aw-ami League has already held an inquiry and has found the BNP and its ruling allies, the Jamaat-e-Islami and other extremists, “responsible for the kill-ings and lootings”.)

Incidentally, one of the two Jamaat ministers is in charge of the social welfare ministry, which is supposed to look after the Hindu community as well. Asked how she reconciled herself to the pro-Taliban stand by the extremist parties when Bangladesh was part of the coalition against terrorism, she said the parties were free to have their own policies. “They never brought up the matter at the cabinet meetings nor had they aired any differences at the government level,” she said. It was, indeed, comical that the BNP’s extremist partners denounced America day in and day out and yet supported as part of the government Khaleda’s pronouncements against Al-Qaeda and Osama bin Laden.

While answering questions on relations with India, she was equivocal. But she took care to see that there was no anti-India remark. She said that some irritants remained between the two countries. But she corrected herself and said, “no irritants,” only problems. She mentioned the Ganga water treaty, which she said, should be reviewed. But it would create no problem because the treaty is already due for review after finishing the run of five years. The period ended on December 31. I asked her point-blank to specify the problems between Bangladesh and India. “Tension on the border between the police of both countries,” was her reply. I purposely mentioned whether she meant the Chittagong Hills Tract, Hasina’s commendable effort which the BNP had characterised as a sellout to India. Khaleda said no and made no other comment.

“I have invited Prime Minister Vajpayee to visit Dhaka and he has agreed to it,” Khaleda said. Asked if she would be visiting India soon, she said that she had been invited but she has no immediate plans to travel to India. She evaded a straight answer to the question of selling gas to India and allowing transiting its goods to the Northeastern states through Bangladesh. I believe that talks on both subjects are in an advanced stage. At one time the BNP was exploiting both points to foment anti-India feelings. It is now the Awami League which is warning the government against selling gas to India. The roles seem to have changed. The BNP does not want to give the Awami League any issue which it may use to mobilise public opinion against the government.

The other ministers, including those in charge of foreign affairs and commerce, I met were positive in their attitude towards India. “We want the best of relations with New Delhi,” they said. They wa- nted close trade relations and unilateral tariff concessions from India. They had their doubts whether it would do so. Khaleda reportedly shares their fears.

Earlier Columns