|
|
| নির্বাচিত পোস্ট | লগইন | রেজিস্ট্রেশন করুন | রিফ্রেস |
রেজাউল করিম ফকির
অধ্যাপক, কোবে গাকুইন বিশ্ববিদ্যালয়
1. Introduction: The Fragility of Political Order
Political order, as scholars from Thomas Hobbes to Francis Fukuyama have argued, rests on a delicate balance of state capacity, legitimacy, and social consensus. When this balance is shattered through extreme violence—particularly political assassination and military coups—the consequences reverberate far beyond the immediate change of leadership. They fundamentally alter the "rules of the game," the distribution of power, and the very nature of political competition within a society.
Bangladesh's experience between August 15, 1975, and May 30, 1981, provides a stark illustration of how political violence can catalyze a complete transformation of political order. This period, marked by the brutal assassination of founding father Sheikh Mujibur Rahman and culminating in the killing of President Ziaur Rahman, represents one of the most dramatic examples of how a nascent democracy can be violently restructured, creating new power dynamics that persist for generations.
2. The Original Political Order: Bangladesh's Democratic Foundation (1971-1975)
When Bangladesh emerged as an independent nation in 1971, it was founded on what political scientists would recognize as relatively strong determinants of political order. The new state enjoyed significant legitimacy derived from a successful liberation war, a charismatic founding leader in Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, and a clear ideological foundation based on four pillars: nationalism, socialism, secularism, and democracy.
According to the theoretical framework of political development, Bangladesh initially possessed several key elements: a monopoly on the legitimate use of force (having defeated Pakistani military forces), strong popular legitimacy through the independence struggle, and institutional foundations laid out in the 1972 Constitution. The Awami League government had successfully established what Hobbes would call a "Leviathan"—a sovereign power capable of maintaining order—while also incorporating Lockean principles of constitutional governance and popular consent.
However, beneath this surface stability lay the seeds of future instability. Economic crisis, administrative inexperience, growing authoritarianism through the BAKSAL one-party system, and factional tensions within the military created vulnerabilities that would prove fatal to the democratic experiment.
3. The Cascade of Violence: Dismantling the Constitutional Order (1975-1981)
3.1 August 15, 1975: The Original Sin
The assassination of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman and most of his family on August 15, 1975, represented far more than a change of government—it was a violent rupture of the entire political system. This event marked "the first direct military intervention in the state and the decisive end of the Awami League's founding order," fundamentally altering Bangladesh's political trajectory:
Destruction of Legitimacy: The killing of the founding father and his family shattered the legitimacy that had emerged from the liberation war. The political order lost its historical anchor and moral foundation.
Shift from Republican to Military Supremacy: In Hobbesian terms, the "Leviathan" shifted from the republican state to factional control within the coercive apparatus. The August-November 1975 sequence replaced constitutional supremacy with military arbitration of political succession, establishing what scholars call a classic "coup trap" dynamic.
Ideological Transformation: The coup facilitated a fundamental shift away from the founding principles of secularism and Bengali nationalism toward a more Islamic and Bangladesh-centric identity.
3.2 The Counter-Coups: November 1975
The events of November 3 ("Jail Killing Day") and November 7, 1975, further demonstrated how political violence, once unleashed, creates its own momentum:
November 3, 1975 - The Jail Killings: Four senior Awami League leaders—Tajuddin Ahmad, Syed Nazrul Islam, M. Mansur Ali, and A.H.M. Qamaruzzaman—were murdered inside Dhaka Central Jail amid a counter-coup struggle. This systematic elimination was designed to permanently decapitate the party's organizational capacity.
November 7, 1975 - The "Soldiers-and-People" Uprising: A complex intervention involving the Biplobi Shainik Sangstha (linked to Lt. Col. Abu Taher) toppled the Khaled Mosharraf faction, bringing Ziaur Rahman to prominence as the central military power-broker.
These events illustrated several key dynamics:
Factionalization: The military splintered into competing factions, each capable of mounting coups against the others, normalizing "praetorian intervention" as an acceptable means of resolving political crises.
Elimination of Alternative Leadership: The brutal nature of the Jail Killings removed any immediate possibility of Awami League revival under its original leadership.
Consolidation through Violence: Ziaur Rahman's eventual rise demonstrated how political order could be reconstructed through the systematic elimination of rivals and the concentration of power in military hands.
3.3 The Final Act: Zia's Assassination (1981)
The assassination of Ziaur Rahman in 1981 completed the transformation begun in 1975. It demonstrated that even military strongmen who had consolidated power through violence remained vulnerable to the same forces they had unleashed. The failed coup attempt by Major General Manzur Ahmed showed that the military's unity had been permanently fractured, creating lasting instability within the institution itself.
3.4 Constitutional Revolution: Rewriting National Identity
Beyond the immediate political changes, the 1975-1981 period witnessed a fundamental constitutional revolution that reshaped Bangladesh's ideological foundations:
The Fifth Amendment (1979): This crucial constitutional change retroactively validated the entire martial-law period and effected both symbolic and substantive ideological transformations:
• Inserted "Bismillahir-Rahmanir-Rahim" (In the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful)
• Replaced "secularism" with "absolute trust and faith in the Almighty Allah"
• Shifted from "Bengali nationalism" to "Bangladeshi nationalism" in core constitutional articles
The Eighth Amendment (1988): Under Ershad's rule, Islam was declared the state religion, further cementing the ideological departure from the secular founding vision.
Institutional Sequencing Reversal: As Fukuyama's framework suggests, Bangladesh experienced a reversal of the optimal sequence of political development. Instead of state building → rule of law → accountable government, the country leaped to personalized executive strength via martial law decrees, while legal constraints and democratic accountability were repeatedly suspended and only partially restored decades later.
Delayed Judicial Correction: The Supreme Court's 2010 Italian Marble Works ruling, which declared the martial-law-validating Fifth Amendment unconstitutional, was a delayed corrective that underscored how far institutional sequencing had drifted. A 2011 reform restored "secularism" to the fundamental principles while retaining Islam as state religion—illustrating a hybrid, path-dependent identity settlement born of the 1975-81 rupture.
4. Reshaping the Determinants of Political Order: A Theoretical Analysis
The violence of 1975-1981 fundamentally altered each of the key determinants of political order identified in the theoretical framework, creating what scholars recognize as a shift from inclusive to extractive political institutions:
4.1 State Capacity and Institutions
From Weberian to Personalized Bureaucracy: The coups and purges incentivized loyalty networks over merit-based administration. Weberian bureaucracy, which depends on impersonal, rules-based governance, was replaced by personalized networks that normalized emergency legislation, ordinance-making, and rule by decree—mechanisms that outlived martial law and periodically resurfaced.
Militarized Monopoly on Force: While the state maintained its monopoly on violence, this monopoly was now exercised primarily through military rather than civilian institutions. The army became both the protector and the primary threat to political order, retaining a credible veto over high politics even under later elected governments.
Erosion of Rule of Law: The repeated suspension of constitutional governance and the normalization of martial law limited the predictability and equal application of law central to Lockean legitimacy.
4.2 Political Economy: Toward Extractive Configurations
Using Acemoglu and Robinson's framework, the post-1975 order tilted decisively toward extractive political institutions. The coup cascade empowered a narrower coalition linking segments of the military, bureaucracy, and business elite. While formal elections existed (notably under Zia), the commanding heights of coercion and key policy levers were controlled by a restricted elite coalition, constraining plural accountability and shaping the distributional rules of the game.
4.3 Legitimacy and Hegemonic Control
Gramscian Hegemony: Post-coup leaders engaged in classic hegemonic consolidation, legitimating their rule by reframing national identity and cultivating media, patronage, and party structures loyal to the executive. This involved elevating "Bangladeshi nationalism" and re-embedding religion in the constitutional grammar while aligning material power with a reshaped common sense to normalize the new order.
From Democratic to Military Legitimacy: The source of governmental authority shifted from electoral mandates to military backing. Future leaders would need to secure military support as much as, if not more than, popular support.
Destruction of National Consensus: The violent elimination of the founding leadership and ideology shattered the national consensus that had emerged from the liberation war, creating lasting divisions.
4.4 Social Foundations Under Strain
Weakened Civil Society: The climate of fear and recurrent coercive episodes depressed associational life and public trust, raising the transaction costs of collective action and long-horizon policy—classic symptoms identified in the social-capital literature.
Constitutional Path-Dependence: The Fifth Amendment's retroactive validation of martial-law acts embedded emergency-era choices into everyday governance. Even after judicial and parliamentary corrections, institutions rarely return to their exact pre-shock state, creating hybrid arrangements that reflect the traumatic transformation.
5. Mechanisms of Irreversible Change: Why 1975-1981 "Stuck"
The transformation of Bangladesh's political order became irreversible through several interconnected mechanisms that scholars have identified as characteristic of major political ruptures:
5.1 Personalization and Zero-Sum Competition
The assassination of Mujib and the Jail Killings decapitated the founding civilian leadership, fundamentally altering the nature of political competition. Competing persons and factions—not parties and programs—became the primary units of politics, raising the stakes of winning office to existential levels. This created what political scientists call a "winner-take-all" dynamic where losing power became synonymous with potential elimination.
5.2 Normalization of Praetorian Intervention
The success of the August 15 and November 7 putsches established the military as an acceptable problem-solver of political crises. The 1981 assassination of Ziaur Rahman confirmed that the officer corps itself had become a primary arena of political contestation, normalizing military intervention as a legitimate form of political action.
5.3 Constitutional Path-Dependence
The Fifth Amendment's retroactive validation of martial-law acts embedded emergency-era choices into everyday governance structures. Even after the Supreme Court struck down key provisions (2010) and parliament re-inserted secularism (2011), the dual legacy—Islam as state religion alongside secularist principles—remained, demonstrating how institutions rarely return to their exact pre-shock state.
5.4 Party-System Bifurcation and Dynastic Politics
Zia's ascent created a durable two-pole system—Awami League versus the party he founded (BNP)—rooted in opposing narratives of 1971 versus 1975-81. The emotional memory of assassinations fused ideology with lineage, entrenching dynastic leadership and polarizing society along personal and historical grievances rather than policy differences.
5.5 Theoretical Synthesis: A Hobbesian Correction Without Lockean Constraint
The 1975-1981 period created what can be understood as a "Hobbesian correction without Lockean constraint." The coups promised order via coercion but eroded the rule-of-law and consent foundations essential for legitimate governance, making political legitimacy brittle and cyclical. This represents what Fukuyama would identify as a "sequencing trap"—strongman state-building preceded the consolidation of legal and electoral accountability, making subsequent democratization partial and reversible.
In Acemoglu and Robinson's terms, the period marked an institutional drift toward extractive equilibria, where concentrated control over the coercive apparatus and constitutional levers narrowed access to power and rents, increasing polarization and lowering the quality of governance. The hegemonic reframing of national identity through constitutional amendments and narrative politics produced a hybrid identity settlement that both legitimized new elites and entrenched cultural divisions.
6. Long-term Consequences: The Permanent Transformation
The events of 1975-1981 created a new political order in Bangladesh characterized by several enduring features:
6.1 The "Two Begums" Dynamic
Perhaps the most visible legacy is the emergence of a binary political system dominated by two dynastic parties—the Awami League (led by Sheikh Hasina, Mujib's surviving daughter) and the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (founded by Zia and later led by his widow, Khaleda Zia). This personalization of politics around the families of the assassination victims has created a political landscape where competition is not merely about policy differences but about historical grievances and survival.
6.2 Military as Kingmaker
Even during periods of civilian rule, the military has remained the ultimate arbiter of political stability. Every Bangladeshi government since 1975 has had to carefully manage civil-military relations, understanding that the army retains the capacity to intervene if it perceives threats to its institutional interests.
6.3 Zero-Sum Political Competition
The brutal nature of the 1975-1981 period established a political culture where losing power is seen as an existential threat. This has led to what political scientists call "winner-take-all" politics, where compromise becomes difficult and each electoral transition is viewed as potentially permanent.
6.4 Weak Institutional Development
The repeated disruptions to constitutional governance prevented the development of strong, autonomous institutions. Instead, state institutions have remained weak and susceptible to politicization by whoever holds power.
7. Contemporary Relevance: The Enduring Legacy
The transformation of Bangladesh's political order between 1975 and 1981 continues to shape the country's political landscape today. Recent events, including the long tenure of Sheikh Hasina's government and ongoing political tensions, can be traced back to the fundamental changes wrought during this period.
The theoretical framework suggests that stable political orders require a balance between state capacity, legitimacy, and social consensus. Bangladesh's experience demonstrates how political violence can permanently disrupt this balance, creating new patterns of governance that persist long after the immediate crisis has passed.
8. Conclusion: The Irreversible Transformation
The period from 1975 to 1981 represents a critical juncture in Bangladesh's political development—what institutional theorists call a "founding moment" that established new rules, norms, and power relationships. The political assassinations and military coups during this period did not merely change governments; they fundamentally rewrote the genetic code of Bangladeshi politics.
The violence unleashed during these years transformed Bangladesh from a nascent democracy with strong legitimacy derived from the liberation war into a hybrid system characterized by weak institutions, personalized politics, and the permanent threat of military intervention. The theoretical determinants of political order—state capacity, legitimacy, rule of law, and social consensus—were all fundamentally altered, creating a new equilibrium that has proven remarkably durable.
Today's Bangladesh, with its persistent political polarization, weak democratic institutions, and ongoing civil-military tensions, is in many ways the direct product of those traumatic six years. Understanding this transformation is crucial not only for comprehending Bangladesh's political development but also for recognizing how political violence can permanently alter the trajectory of nations, creating new forms of order that may persist for generations.
The case of Bangladesh thus serves as a sobering reminder of the fragility of democratic institutions and the lasting consequences of political violence. Once the constitutional order is shattered through assassination and coups, rebuilding stable, legitimate governance becomes exponentially more difficult, as the very foundations of political trust and institutional authority have been permanently compromised.
০ টি 
+০/-০©somewhere in net ltd.