The post-election comment by some people was that the dynasty was back. ``We can't do without them,'' said one professor. He had also in mind Bangladesh Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, who is daughter of the late Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, the country's founder. ``Sonia Gandhi's son or daughter will now come in'' was one remark. A senior Bangladesh minister made a tongue-in-cheek comment: ``Had I been in India I would have got a chance to become the prime minister. If you can have an Italian-born lady, why not me, a Bangladeshi?'' In the same same vein, the defeat of the BJP was interpreted as the rolling back of the party, which was trying tosupplant a pluralistic society with the uniculture of Hindutva.

Yet the discussion on the elections was limited. I asked a number of journalists, academics and politicians why the interest in the crucial state elections in India was so little. Their reply was that Bangladesh itself was beset with numerous problems and had little time for anything else.

Indeed, the country is absorbed in its own domestic difficulties. The biggest among them is the never-ending hostility between Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina and former Prime Minister Khalida Zia. ``These women,'' is generally the remark, no doubt, betraying male chauvinism but also putting the finger on the source of the trouble. Sheikh Hasina and Khalida Zia have never seen eye to eye with each other. Their roles have changed, Kalida Zia is the opposition leader while Sheikh Hasina has come to power. But the hatred of the one against the other has not lessened over the years.

One attempt was made by the American ambassador in Dhaka recently to bring themtogether. The formula was that the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP), led by Khalida Zia, should recognise the late Sheikh Mujibur Rahman as the father of the nation. In return, Sheikh Hasina offered to find ``a suitable place'' in the Bangladesh history for the late Ziaur Rahman, Khalida Zia's husband. But the latter did not agree to the proposal.

In fact, she and her party leaders have been attacking Mujibur Rahman for being ``Pakistan's collaborator.'' Khalida has asked publicly why Islamabad, ``which killed three million Bangladeshis during the liberation struggle, spared Sheikh Mujibur Rahman.'' For Sheikh Hasina, this is the unkindest cut. She weepingly told the National Assembly after the assassins of the Sheikh were brought to book: ``Why did they kill all members of my family, including my 10-year-old brother, Russell?''

Her sufferings -- she has been in the wilderness for 21 years have made her bitter and even intolerant. Nearly 8,000 cases have been registered against the BNP leaders and itsactivists. One of her cabinet ministers defended her by arguing that she had undergone so much ``torture'' at the hands of the successive governments, including the BNP, that ``she is paying them back in their own coin.''

This may have a grain of truth. But the intractable relationship between the two has split the society vertically and horizontally. Every segment of activity has got divided into anti-Awami League and anti-BNP. So much so, the same feeling has developed cracks within the bureaucracy, the police and the armed forces. Still worse is the nomenclature of anti-liberation given to the supporters of Khalida Zia. It is true that some of them did help Pakistan but most of them fought against it.

This ugly mood has put a question mark over the future -- and the development of Bangladesh. Even She-ikh Hasina's unilateral offer not to have hartal if and when she goes out of power has not evoked a positive response from Khalida Zia, who continues to instigate her supporters against the government.The fear is that she and the opposition parties may push the country into a long spell of hartals before long, endangering the progress made so far.

Yet it is tremendous to see that the ravages of floods, which affected two-thirds of the country, have left very few marks, except an increase in the number of rickshaw-pullers in Dhaka. The government has given a bit of assistance to the flood victims all over the country. But what has pulled through Bangladesh is essentially the people's own effort, which has helped them regain normalcy so quickly.

The communication system never broke down even though the floodwater did not recede for weeks. Roads in Dhaka, where water stood for two months, have no potholes. I dare not compare them with roads in Delhi and elsewhere in India. Donor nations, which bear the main burden of foreign exchange requirement in Bangladesh, are surprised over the resilience of Bangladeshis.

But then the general belief is that the nation has never been united from day one, even whenit was East Pakistan. However, all concede that they sunk their differences while fighting elections in 1970 when they were part of Pakistan. After winning a majority in the National Assembly, they remained together to claim the formation of government. ``We were not so united even during the liberation war,'' says a cabinet minister.

Khalida Zia has another reason to oppose Sheikh Hasina. The latter wants friendly relations with India. For some reasons, Khalida Zia's hatred against New Delhi is so deep that she continues to be against the India-Bangladesh water treaty and Chittagong Hill Tract agreement, which solved two major disputes between the two countries. A lot of anti-Indian sentiment is being spread by her supporters.

Returning home I found that the Congress, even after the recovery, has gone back to its old methods. The Congress legislators in Delhi, Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan left it to Sonia Gandhi to select their leaders. This is what happened during the days of Indira Gandhi and RajivGandhi. Why can't members be allowed to choose freely? One explanation given to me is that the consensus was found before naming the leader. If it was so, the entire process should have been transparent. In its absence, the impression is that the coterie system is back.