The upcoming elections in Bangladesh, scheduled for January 2024, may be small in size, but they are consequential for the densely populated country of over 167 million people. The outcomes of these elections will have a significant impact on political and economic stability, not only in Bangladesh but also in the broader region. Since the end of military rule in 1991, the Awami League (AL), led by Sheikh Hasina, and the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP), currently led by former Prime Minister Khaleda Zia, have alternated rule of the country. The exception to this trend was in 2007 when a military-backed caretaker government postponed elections amidst a backdrop of political violence.
The current situation in Bangladesh is reminiscent of the past. The BNP is calling for a caretaker government to oversee the administration of the upcoming elections, claiming that the current ruling party cannot be trusted, and the elections will be partisan. These concerns are valid, given the existence of corruption in Bangladesh, but they do not justify an overhaul of the democratic process. Instead, the international community, particularly the EU, can focus on observation efforts to ensure that the January elections are free and fair.
The alternative of an unelected provisional government will lack legitimacy and may lead to a dictatorship, as seen in Bangladesh's past. Such failed experiments are not limited to Bangladesh. Interim governments have a tendency to stay beyond their intended mandate, breeding further instability and even violence. Recent examples include Iraq, where a government was finally formed after thirteen months, and Lebanon, where an interim government led by Najib Mikati remains in power. In Pakistan, a system of short-term caretaker governments was installed to ostensibly ensure neutrality during elections. In practice, however, this approach has been an abject failure, resulting in ineffective rule that often fails to ensure a smooth and peaceful transition of power.
Caretaker governments have tended to be weak, often reflecting the divisions within their respective societies. In Israel, for example, the current government won by a relatively slim margin in terms of the popular vote and then proceeded to embark on a deeply controversial and far-reaching judicial reform program. This course of action inflamed deeply rooted tensions within Israeli society, raising concerns over its impact on the IDF and national security.
Abraham Lincoln's words advocating for government “of the people, by the people, (and) for the people” remain true in Bangladesh today. The core of legitimate policy debates is what is best “for the people.” However, the people, all of them, must have their say. Societal divisions are not uncommon, but the way to heal these wounds is to attempt to breed a broad national consensus, not by pushing through majoritarian or minoritarian sweeping changes that lack legitimacy. Any attempt to install a caretaker government in Bangladesh is inherently contradictory to these principles and may set the country back years if not decades.
The decisions Bangladesh makes in the coming year will send a strong signal throughout the region and abroad at a time when democracy is increasingly in peril around the world. The United States and the international community are watching and expect free and fair elections to take place on time as prescribed. It is up to the people of Bangladesh not to let them down.
In conclusion, Bangladesh's upcoming elections are consequential and will have a significant impact on the political and economic stability of the country and the region. While the concerns of corruption and bias are valid, they do not justify an overhaul of the democratic process. Instead, the international community can focus on observation efforts to ensure that the January elections are free and fair. Caretaker governments have tended to breed further instability and even violence, and any attempt to install one in Bangladesh may set the country back years. It is up to the people of Bangladesh to ensure that their voices are heard.
The current situation in Bangladesh is reminiscent of the past. The BNP is calling for a caretaker government to oversee the administration of the upcoming elections, claiming that the current ruling party cannot be trusted, and the elections will be partisan. These concerns are valid, given the existence of corruption in Bangladesh, but they do not justify an overhaul of the democratic process. Instead, the international community, particularly the EU, can focus on observation efforts to ensure that the January elections are free and fair.
The alternative of an unelected provisional government will lack legitimacy and may lead to a dictatorship, as seen in Bangladesh's past. Such failed experiments are not limited to Bangladesh. Interim governments have a tendency to stay beyond their intended mandate, breeding further instability and even violence. Recent examples include Iraq, where a government was finally formed after thirteen months, and Lebanon, where an interim government led by Najib Mikati remains in power. In Pakistan, a system of short-term caretaker governments was installed to ostensibly ensure neutrality during elections. In practice, however, this approach has been an abject failure, resulting in ineffective rule that often fails to ensure a smooth and peaceful transition of power.
Caretaker governments have tended to be weak, often reflecting the divisions within their respective societies. In Israel, for example, the current government won by a relatively slim margin in terms of the popular vote and then proceeded to embark on a deeply controversial and far-reaching judicial reform program. This course of action inflamed deeply rooted tensions within Israeli society, raising concerns over its impact on the IDF and national security.
Abraham Lincoln's words advocating for government “of the people, by the people, (and) for the people” remain true in Bangladesh today. The core of legitimate policy debates is what is best “for the people.” However, the people, all of them, must have their say. Societal divisions are not uncommon, but the way to heal these wounds is to attempt to breed a broad national consensus, not by pushing through majoritarian or minoritarian sweeping changes that lack legitimacy. Any attempt to install a caretaker government in Bangladesh is inherently contradictory to these principles and may set the country back years if not decades.
The decisions Bangladesh makes in the coming year will send a strong signal throughout the region and abroad at a time when democracy is increasingly in peril around the world. The United States and the international community are watching and expect free and fair elections to take place on time as prescribed. It is up to the people of Bangladesh not to let them down.
In conclusion, Bangladesh's upcoming elections are consequential and will have a significant impact on the political and economic stability of the country and the region. While the concerns of corruption and bias are valid, they do not justify an overhaul of the democratic process. Instead, the international community can focus on observation efforts to ensure that the January elections are free and fair. Caretaker governments have tended to breed further instability and even violence, and any attempt to install one in Bangladesh may set the country back years. It is up to the people of Bangladesh to ensure that their voices are heard.