By S. Sultan
The emergence of Bangladesh in 1971 in the name of Bengali nationalism signaled the departure of “political Islam” or Islam-based state ideology of the Pakistani period (1947–71) soon after its emergence, Bangladesh adopted the four-pronged state ideology of nationalism, democracy, socialism and secularism. However, not long after the emergence of the nation-state, Islam re-emerged as an important factor in the country, both socially and politically. It is noteworthy that most Bangladeshi Muslims suffer from a tremendous identity crisis. They are not sure which comes first—their loyalty toward Islam or toward Bangladesh. It seems, after the failure of the “socialist-secular-Bengali nationalist” Mujib government in 1975, his successors realized the importance of political Islam to legitimize their rule; hence, the rapid Islamization of the polity.
Since Bangladesh is the third-largest Muslim country in the world (after Indonesia and Pakistan), it is only natural to assume that Islam plays an important role in molding its politics and culture. Around 90 percent of the population is Muslim the abysmal failure of Mujibism to alleviate poverty and restore law and order eventually led to the Islamization of the polity. Mujib, on the one hand, promoting the idea that secularism “did not mean the absence of religion,” was giving generous state patronage to madrassa education and, on the other hand, religion for his government “was a shadow, the ghost of the past one did not know how to deal with.
Hasina’s regime (1996–2001) demonstrated no inclination towards secularism and opposition to Islamization. However, the second term (2009–2014), in coalition with the leftist parties, witnessed a major shift in its governance style—from acceptance of Islamization towards the process of secularization. The regime restored secularism as a state ideology, however, paradoxically retained Islamic phrase and provision of state religion in the constitution. Driven by the ideology of secularism, the regime is reported to have been so desperate to “de-Islamize Bangladesh” that some scholars have marked it as an emergence of “ultra-secularism”, “violent secularism”, or “authoritarian secularism”.
Deviating from her father’s later approach, Sheikh Hasina in her second term of premiership began to shrink the religious (Islam’s) space in the Majoritarian Muslim state—a situation Islam phrased as ‘minority Islam’ in Muslim majority Bangladesh.” Apart from the replacement of secularism in the Islamic provisions of the constitution, the regime consciously adopted political measures to pave the way for a secular Bangladesh. The rise of assertive secularism in the beginning of the 2010s by the Hasina’s regime has made a serious confrontation between pro-Islamist and pro-secularist people. Once again secularism has been established arbitrarily and without any consensus of the people.
When khalida Zia was in power from 2001 to 2006, the BNP introduced various measures that benefitted Islamist parties and conservative Madrassahs. In its campaign for the 2008 elections, which it lost, the BNP used the slogan “save Islam and the country”.
At the beginning of its tenure, the AL pushed secularization in the state. In 2011, it passed a National Women Development Policy that was fiercely opposed by Islamist actors and reinstated secularism into the constitution both of these moves were protested by the hitherto unknown Hefazat-e-Islam, an orthodox Deobandi movement rooted in the country's Qawmi Madrassahs.
Hefazat-e-Islam was set up by a cleric, Shah Ahmad Shafi, in 2010. In 2009, when the Sheikh Hasina government came up with reforms including inheritance rights for women, Shah Ahmad Shafi’s Hefazat protested against these reforms. This resulted in the law being watered down by the Bangladesh government.
Gupta said it is this new conservative force, which the Sheikh Hasina government had flirted with in the past, which has become her government’s own Frankenstein. “The Hefazat-e-Islam, the force behind the current protest, are the new Islamist conservative force in Bangladesh with which Sheikh Hasina’s government has flirted with at some point…But it’s a mistake that all democratic governments make in trying to control one set of extremists. They often play with the other set that looks less worse than the other (but) in the course of time, they all become Frankenstein”.
Sheikh Mujeeb-ur-Rehman was also a pro Islamist leader and introduced many Islamic movements and reforms in Bangladesh in his era (1971-75). During the era of Khaleda Zia, in her terms, Islam and its policies were made compulsory and implemented all over the state. Sheikh Hasian Wajid, during her term Bangladesh wanted to bring some reforms which were opposed by Hefazat-e-Islam which created clash between government and the religious scholars of the state. Moreover the AL pushed secularization in the state in 2011 soon after coming into power. These actions of AL made people of Bangladesh to think as it is against Islam and Sheikh Hasina as an anti Islam.
The Bangladesh national party (BNP) lost its most of worth due to boycott in elections in 2014. The imprisonment of its party leader; Begum Khaleda Zia since 2018 has developed sympathies in the general masses. BNP is likely to give tough fight AL in forthcoming elections in 2023. AL’s leader sheikh hasina wajed is on weaker end due to direct link with India and anti Islamic sentiments.Another reason is the close collaboration of sheikh hasina with Indian government and its policies, which depicts the anti Islamic sentiments towards Bangladeshi people as India is anti-Islamic state.