Richardson’s Visit to Bangladesh: Some speculation

6 March 1996, Daily Star

US Congressman widely known as a trouble shooter for his outstanding contribution and excellence in resolving disputes and crises wherein US interests and concerns were serious, could also have played a kind of shuttle diplomacy to bring the two topmost leaders_ BNP chairperson Prime Minister Khaleda Zia and AL president and erstwhile leader of the opposition Sheikh Hasina – to a “Negotiating Table” at least during his recent presence at Dhaka But. Instead of doing so, he took resort to quiet diplomacy and left Bangladesh with a seemingly impression that BNP’s stand and post-election approach were logical, pragmatic and time-oriented to come out of the long-standing and staggering stalemate that has brought this country virtually to a total standstill.

At the end of his two-day unofficial visit to Bangladesh the trouble-shooter law-maker while talking to the waiting press at the Zia International Airport, just prior to his departure for Washington, apprised the nation of his detection of a few shots (may be termed as trouble shooter’s shots or Richardson’s formula) which he believed could be effective to put and end to the present impasse in Bangladesh. The shots are:

Dialogue, not confrontation between the leaders: Because he felt “since there was no dialogue between the two leaders for a long time, crisis aggravated”;

· Dialogue without any precondition. Because he might have a realization out of his talks with Khaleda Zia and Sheikh Hasina that pre-condition worked as an obstacle for opening any dialogue between them in particular and leaders in general;

· Dialogue can be started from where it stopped in January: Because if a dialogue is to be resumed, it needs a start or point and it is better to start from the where it stopped and

· It is up to the leaders to solve their problem: Because he understands “US cannot substitute for Bangladesh own initiative and ingenuity to solve the problem” and hence, it is up to the parties concerned to come out with a solution.

There is no denying the fact that before going for a thorough anatomy, analysis and consequently testing the applicability of the shots of the trouble-shooter, a careful enquiry into the stands and formulas of BNP and AL backed by the opposition is an unavoidable pre-condition.

BNP’s post-election stand goes as under:

BNP being the party in power had to go for elections to the sixth Sangsad out of its constitutional obligation under the circumstances, favorable or not. With the elections over, constitution has duly been served, preserved, and fortified;

· As the very elections were not for staying in power for the constitutionally stipulated 5-year term, dialogue should be started with opposition to reach at a formula or consensus for a free, fair and fully participated election and

· Putting the consensus formula into a bill and getting it passed accordingly by the Sixth Sangsad before moving for a free, fair and fully participated election under the new arrangement – caretaker or interim caretaker government whatever the name may be.

Opposition-backed AL’s post-election formula stands for:

· Immediate cancellation of the elections of February 15;

· Resignation of BNP cabinet or dismissal of BNP cabinet by the President, if required with a reference from Supreme Court and

· Finally, a call by the President to the political parties including BNP to sit with him to devise the details to form a neutral caretaker government to conduct the next fair, free and fully participated election.

In reality the stands and formulas of BNP and AL backed by the opposition are diametrically opposed to each other, and are overwhelmed with their own interpretation, logic, analysis and approaches to a possible solution of the problem.

With this broad-based perspective in mind, if we proceed to apply the shots of the trouble-shooter Congressman to put an end to the crisis, we find that his

First shot calling for a dialogue between the two leaders and fourth shot asking our leaders to solve our own problem by ourselves without looking for any outside solution, tantamount to a generalized reality and necessity about which nobody objects.

His second shot insisting on dialogue without any pre-condition itself appears to be a pre-condition for AL and the opposition as it contains the very basis for immediate pre-recognition, or, to say more appropriately, auto-recognition to the legitimacy of BNP Government that came out through the elections of February 15. It’s a negation to his own reassertion to the stand of US State Department that stated rather unequivocally that the election was flawed and heavily rigged.

His third shot – start form where it stopped in January – is in fact his second request to AL and the opposition to extend support to the legitimacy of BNP Government. Dialogue was stopped in January also because of detection of ambiguities and differences of opinions among BNP negotiators. Besides, starting from the last stoppage means to forget what happened during the intermediary period.

Richardson’s formula, In fact willingly or unwillingly, reflects the stand of BNP. If he thought that ends might not be allowed to be jeopardized by the means, in that case BNP government may have a sigh of relief of being in place.

It may be viewed also this way: Once BNP denied both the ends and the means. Now it embraces both; the difference is by conceding both, it wants to get legitimacy of the elections to the sixth Sangsad.

Interestingly enough Richardson has, until recently not budged a single inch from the stand and policy of Clinton Administration being manifested by the statements and briefings of the State Department, before and after the elections. After going back to Washington had talks with fellow Congressmen and the Administrating and further reiterated his stand on Bangladesh stating, “By all counts, the election left a lot to be desired,” and pointed out, “If asked by all parties, we will be glad, of course, to give advice. We do that privately.” He categorically emphasized on dialogue between the parties concerned.

BNP joint secretary general and agriculture minister Mannan Bhuiyan who his a recently been assigned by the, PM and BNP chairperson Khaleda Zia to start contacts with the opposition said to the press: “We think the atmosphere to sit in a dialogue still exists and the possibility of an acceptable solution is bright as both the sides have an obligation to the nation.” Commenting on the government’s move to arrest the opposition leaders and activists he pointed out that thing would be OK. In course of time Meanwhile in her address over Radio and Television on March 3. Prime Minister Khaleda Zia echoed the same in her 3-point formula_ 1) Constitution bill to be amended the 1^st session of 9^th Sangsad ; 2) Election to the 7^th Sangsad within shortest possible time; 3) EC to have full power to conduct the polls urging all political parties, groups and professional organizations and the people to extend cooperation to resolve the political crisis. But, outright and instant rejection of her call by the opposition perhaps accelerated the speed of the 23-month-long standoff moving towards and unknown black hole.

Requests appeals, attempts and advices, national and international, are being constantly made to both Khaleda Zia and Sheikh Hasina to save the nation without any further delay. In an open letter to them President of DCCI requested for Khaleda’s “magnanimity” and Hasina’s “flexibility and welfare-oriented steps’. FBCCI president categorically made fervent calls for immediate consensus between the two leaders.

Now should we treat AL and the opposition’s 6-point programmed of non-cooperation movement from March 9 till the fall of BNP government as also a direct rejection to the trouble-shooter’s shots?

Both AL and BNP still remain tight-lipped about the outcome of their talks with Richardson and about his shots. No formal available has yet been made available. Have the talks and meetings conceived anything positive at all that may be workable very soon otherwise?

Richardson said that he would report back to the Administration and the Congress in Washington. In the wake of the highly-talked about “Congressional Hearing on Bangladesh” Scheduled to be held sometime in the last week of March, this very Congressional contact, first of its kind, under the existing circumstances shall have its own weight, value and significance as Richardson, a Democrat himself, disclosed that the visit was made at the request of President Clinton to have an understanding of the problem here.

Republicans are now dominating Houses of Congress, Senate and House of Representatives. Sheikh Hasina is said to have established links with the Republicans in particular and Democrats in general, including Bob Dole, leader of the majority in the Senate and Benjamin Gilman, Chairman of the international committee of the House of Representatives.

Muntasir Mamun, a noted historian and professor of history, University of Dhaka observed with a very careful bent of mind: “Bangladesh is a land where everything is possible.” So, who knows that the very Congressional hearing on Bangladesh shall not be faced with an unexpected political scenario favorable and congenial for the people at large in Bangladesh?.