Bangladesh is being governed by a caretaker government since the time Begum Khaleda Zia resigned as Prime Minister in October 2006 when her term settled down.…… after initial hiccups the caretaker government has settled down now since January under the leadership of Fakhruddin Ahmed , an economist and a technocrat , a sort of Bangladesh’s answer to Manmohan Singh. Like our Prime Minister, the Bangladesh Chief Advisor (the nomenclature for Prime Minister in the care taker government vocabulary, is widely respected. The care taker government’s role typically in previous incarnations is to hold free and fair elections to the national parliament, much like holding elections to state assemblies in India under President’s Rule in India.
This is all fine except that Bangladesh has been under caretaker government rule since October 2006 and the elections that are the main mandate of the care taker government have been announced in the end of 2008, with the specific dates still not yet announced. Surely a long time to do baby sitting! A fact worth noting is jus as Manmohan Singh is believed in many aspects of governance to be beholden to his Party High Command, Bangladesh’s Chief Advisor , Fakhruddin Ahmed, is believed by many to be equally beholden to his high command , General Moeen U Ahmed, the Chief of the Bngladesh Army.
It sems that the reticient general loaths the politicans of the kind that are available in bangladesh at the moment and wants to lend as much teeth and time to the care taker government to not just conduct elections but clean up the political scene, hopefully for good. in a enviornment where the Chief Advisor and the Army Chief are apolitical and largely neutral , they have gone after the leaders of both the political parties in the country with equal vigor by jailing leaders from both sides. Though , none of the two Begums Khaleda and Hasina , by disempowering their inner coterie, the government hopes to render them ineffective. The care taker government seems to have learnt its lessons from Pakistan, where exiling Nawaz Sharif and Benazir Bhutto did not lead to any significant lessening of their influence. Here the strategy seems to be wakening the widely party hierarchs perceived to be widely corrupt from with in.
Many of the reforms that the care taker government are carrying out are good and laudable and should typically have been done by a regular elected government with a mandate to do so. It is a pity of course that they did not. Now the question facing Bangla and the larger global community is this : Does the fact that the current regime is acting with the best of interests to all intents and purposes and doing things that seem to have poular sanction provide it with legitimcy to stay in office indefinitely. Is being democratically elected the sine qua non of legitimacyor is there any other? As Bangladesh's own history proves and examples will be available from India too, the so called democratically elected governments can be ruinous and benevolent despots like Lee Kuan Yew can be tarnsformational. As the story from Bangaldesh proves , a nation some times has to confront the question – Is a country better off under a benevolent caretaker manager than a tyrannical democrat ?
This is all fine except that Bangladesh has been under caretaker government rule since October 2006 and the elections that are the main mandate of the care taker government have been announced in the end of 2008, with the specific dates still not yet announced. Surely a long time to do baby sitting! A fact worth noting is jus as Manmohan Singh is believed in many aspects of governance to be beholden to his Party High Command, Bangladesh’s Chief Advisor , Fakhruddin Ahmed, is believed by many to be equally beholden to his high command , General Moeen U Ahmed, the Chief of the Bngladesh Army.
It sems that the reticient general loaths the politicans of the kind that are available in bangladesh at the moment and wants to lend as much teeth and time to the care taker government to not just conduct elections but clean up the political scene, hopefully for good. in a enviornment where the Chief Advisor and the Army Chief are apolitical and largely neutral , they have gone after the leaders of both the political parties in the country with equal vigor by jailing leaders from both sides. Though , none of the two Begums Khaleda and Hasina , by disempowering their inner coterie, the government hopes to render them ineffective. The care taker government seems to have learnt its lessons from Pakistan, where exiling Nawaz Sharif and Benazir Bhutto did not lead to any significant lessening of their influence. Here the strategy seems to be wakening the widely party hierarchs perceived to be widely corrupt from with in.
Many of the reforms that the care taker government are carrying out are good and laudable and should typically have been done by a regular elected government with a mandate to do so. It is a pity of course that they did not. Now the question facing Bangla and the larger global community is this : Does the fact that the current regime is acting with the best of interests to all intents and purposes and doing things that seem to have poular sanction provide it with legitimcy to stay in office indefinitely. Is being democratically elected the sine qua non of legitimacyor is there any other? As Bangladesh's own history proves and examples will be available from India too, the so called democratically elected governments can be ruinous and benevolent despots like Lee Kuan Yew can be tarnsformational. As the story from Bangaldesh proves , a nation some times has to confront the question – Is a country better off under a benevolent caretaker manager than a tyrannical democrat ?
No comments:
Post a Comment