Issuu

The

Jamaat

Question in

Bangladesh : Islam, Politics and Society in a Post-Democratic Nation 1st Edition

Syed Serajul Islam

Visit to download the full and correct content document: https://textbookfull.com/product/the-jamaat-question-in-bangladesh-islam-politics-andsociety-in-a-post-democratic-nation-1st-edition-syed-serajul-islam/

More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant download maybe you interests ...

Secularism and Islam in Bangladesh 1st Edition Abdul Wohab

https://textbookfull.com/product/secularism-and-islam-inbangladesh-1st-edition-abdul-wohab/

Climate Change, Migration and Conflict in Bangladesh 1st Edition Islam

https://textbookfull.com/product/climate-change-migration-andconflict-in-bangladesh-1st-edition-islam/

Coercion and responsibility in Islam : a study in ethics and law 1st Edition Syed

https://textbookfull.com/product/coercion-and-responsibility-inislam-a-study-in-ethics-and-law-1st-edition-syed/

Resurgent Islam and the Politics of Identity Ali A. Mazrui

https://textbookfull.com/product/resurgent-islam-and-thepolitics-of-identity-ali-a-mazrui/

Islam in Indonesia: The Contest for Society, Ideas and Values 1st Edition Carool

Kersten

https://textbookfull.com/product/islam-in-indonesia-the-contestfor-society-ideas-and-values-1st-edition-carool-kersten/

Becoming Good Muslim The Tablighi Jamaat in the UK and Bangladesh 1st Edition Bulbul Siddiqi (Auth.)

https://textbookfull.com/product/becoming-good-muslim-thetablighi-jamaat-in-the-uk-and-bangladesh-1st-edition-bulbulsiddiqi-auth/

Terrorist in Search of Humanity Militant Islam and Global Politics 1st Edition Faisal Devji

https://textbookfull.com/product/terrorist-in-search-of-humanitymilitant-islam-and-global-politics-1st-edition-faisal-devji/

Terrorist in Search of Humanity: Militant Islam and Global Politics 1st Edition Faisal Devji

https://textbookfull.com/product/terrorist-in-search-of-humanitymilitant-islam-and-global-politics-1st-edition-faisal-devji-2/

Islam And Security In The West Stefano Bonino

https://textbookfull.com/product/islam-and-security-in-the-weststefano-bonino/

‘This collection of essays on Bangladesh’s place in the world stands out in the crowded field of writings on political Islam. The editors offer a comprehensive survey and analysis of Islam’s political role in the Muslim world’s third most populous nation.’

Shabbir Akhtar, Regent’s Park College, University of Oxford

‘The Jamaat Question offers a nuanced exploration of Bangladesh’s sociopolitical landscape, focusing on Jamaat, its largest Islam-based party. Bridging multiple disciplines, this insightful volume sheds light on Jamaat’s controversial and constructive role in Bangladesh’s tumultuous politics. An essential read for scholars probing the complexities of Islam, politics, and society in modern Bangladesh.’

Mohammad A Auwal, Department of Communication Studies, California State University, Los Angeles

‘The Jamaat Question in Bangladesh is a marvellous compendium, a sparkling collection of gems from the established authors of political Islam in Bangladesh. Destined to become a masterpiece in the field, the volume, for the first time, delves deep into the local politics in Bangladesh with global relevance. Empirically rich and theoretically sophisticated, this dazzling collection of essays will mark a new era of reconciliation between Islamic and secular politics in Bangladesh and beyond.’

Md Yousuf Ali, Islamic Philosophy and Islamic Thought, Universiti Sains Islam Malaysia (USIM)

The Jamaat Question in Bangladesh

The Jamaat Question in Bangladesh addresses the complex intersection of global politics and local dynamics in Bangladesh, particularly in relation to Bangladesh Jamaat-e-Islami (Jamaat).

With multidisciplinary insights and perspectives, the contributors to this volume provide an objective socio-historical analysis of Islam, politics and society in Bangladesh. Separating fact from fiction, they attempt to uncover the truth about Jamaat, the largest Islam-based political party in the country. Suppressed and marginalized by the BAL regime, Jamaat remains active in the social landscape of Bangladesh. What makes Jamaat so resilient against all odds? Can it peacefully coexist with rival political parties in a polarized nation such as Bangladesh? This book seeks to answer these crucial questions.

An essential read for those interested in Bangladeshi politics and political Islam.

Syed Serajul Islam is Professor and Former Chair of the Department of Political Studies at Lakehead University, Orillia, Canada.

Md Saidul Islam is Associate Professor and the Post-graduate Coordinator of Sociology at Nanyang Technological University, Singapore.

Politics in Asia

Substantive Representation of Women in Asian Parliaments

Edited Devin K. Joshi and Christian Echle

Activism and Authoritarian Governance in Asia

Edited by Amy Barrow and Sara Fuller

Japan’s Security Policy

Keiji Nakatsuji

India’s Southeast Asia Policy During the Cold War

Identity, Inclination and Pragmatism 1947–1989

Edited by Tridib Chakraborti and Mohor Chakraborty

Contemporary Japanese Politics and Anxiety Over Governance

Ken’ichi Ikeda

Comparative Federalism in Asia

Democracy, Ethnicity and Religion

Baogang He, Michael G. Breen and Laura Allison-Reumann

Taiwan and Southeast Asia

Soft Power and Hard Truths Facing China’s Ascendancy

Karl Chee Leong Lee and Ying-kit Chan

The Political Economy of China–Myanmar Relations

Yizheng Zou

The Jamaat Question in Bangladesh

Islam, Politics and Society in a Post-Democratic Nation

Edited by Syed Serajul Islam and Md Saidul Islam

For more information about this series, please visit: www.routledge.com/Politics-in-Asia/ book-series/PIA

The Jamaat Question in Bangladesh

Islam, Politics and Society in a Post-Democratic Nation

Edited by Syed Serajul Islam and Md Saidul Islam

First published 2024 by Routledge

4 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN and by Routledge 605 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10158

Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business

The right of Syed Serajul Islam and Md Saidul Islam to be identified as the authors of the editorial material, and of the authors for their individual chapters, has been asserted in accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers.

Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe.

British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data

A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library

ISBN: 978-1-032-31638-3 (hbk)

ISBN: 978-1-032-31639-0 (pbk)

ISBN: 978-1-003-31067-9 (ebk)

DOI: 10.4324/9781003310679

Typeset in Galliard by Apex CoVantage, LLC

List of Illustrations ix List of Contributors x Acknowledgements xv

1 Jamaat Question in Post-Democratic Bangladesh 1 MD SAIDUL ISLAM

2 Emergence of Islam and the Formation of Muslim Society in Bangladesh 15 MD NAZRUL ISLAM

3 Politics of Islam in Bangladesh and the Role of Jamaat 43 SYED SERAJUL ISLAM

4 Jamaat and Shibir: From Islamic Revolutionary to Ideal Citizen 63 NAZMUS SAKIB

5 Jamaat and Democracy: Constitutionalism, Electoral Politics and Complacency

6 Social Welfare Programmes in the Politics of Jamaat in Bangladesh: A Social Movement Theory Perspective

7 Behind the Story: Bir th of Islami Bank Bangladesh Limited and the Role of Jamaat

MOHAMMAD NAKIBUR RAHMAN AND ABDULLAH M. NOMAN

8 Treatment of Jamaat and Shibir in Post-Democratic Bangladesh

ANWARUL WADUD AND

SAIDUL ISLAM

9 Execution of Jamaat Leaders: National Villain or Fallen Heroes?

10 The International Crimes Tribunal, Bangladesh: Courting Controversy

TOBY CADMAN, CARL BUCKLEY AND JACK SPROSON

11 Jamaat and Bangladesh: Towards a Cohesive Narrative

SAIDUL ISLAM AND MD NAZRUL ISLAM

7.1

6.3 Number of Recipients of One-off Financial Aid From the ISWCC

7.1

8.1 BAL’s Election and Post-election Carnages (2014)

8.2 Political Violence in Bangladesh (2012–2016)

8.3 Victims of Enforced Disappearances (Missing Till

8.4 Treatment of Jamaat by BAL Regime (January 2009–March 2021)

8.5 List of Jamaat-Shibir Activists Killed by BAL -Regime (2009–2020)

Contributors

Faroque Amin is Adjunct Research Fellow at the School of Social Sciences in Western Sydney University, Australia. Additionally, he serves as Research Fellow in Politics and Religion at The Future Institute, UK. He also holds the position of Treasurer at the South Asian Policy Initiative, besides serving as the Editor of Suprovat Sydney, a community newspaper published in Australia. Dr. Amin completed his doctoral research on Islamic politics at the School of Social Sciences at Western Sydney University. Prior to that, he pursued a master’s degree in Usul al-Din and Comparative Religion at the International Islamic University Malaysia. He also studied Arabic language at Al-Imam Muhammad ibn Saud Islamic University in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, following his undergraduate studies in Da’wah and Islamic Studies at the International Islamic University Chittagong, Bangladesh. His research interests encompass various areas such as Islamic politics, Islamic theology, sociology of religion and contemporary political thought. He has contributed to these fields through the publication of several journal articles.

Maruf Billah is Senior Lecturer at the Faculty of Law, University Technology MARA (UiTM), Malaysia. He’s also serving as the Deputy Managing Editor of the UiTM Review on Human Rights and Sustainability Law. He did his PhD and LLM from Nagoya University, Japan, with the Japanese government’s specialized research grants Leading Daigaku and completed his LLB. from International Islamic University Malaysia with the Malaysian International Scholarship under the Ministry of Higher Education Malaysia. He’s a former Visiting Scholar of the Institute of Legal Studies, Chandigarh University, India, and a Shariah Expert in the halal auditing committee of Japan Islamic Trust. Dr. Billah’s research interests include international criminal law, human rights law, treaty law, International Criminal Court, and Islamic law and jurisprudence. He has published several peer-reviewed journal articles on these topics and presented many papers at international seminars and conferences in Malaysia and Japan. He’s currently working as a regular reviewer of several international law journals. He’s also a member of the Asian Society of International Law.

Carl Buckley is a member of the 33 Bedford Row Civil and Commercial Practice Group, the International Practice Group and the Public Law Practice

Group. He is experienced in all aspects of civil litigation with a particular focus on actions against the police and public authorities, claims under the data protection, and the European convention on human rights. In terms of international law, Carl is a specialist in the areas of international criminal and public law, international humanitarian law, human rights, transitional justice and the rule of law. Carl has brought numerous claims for judicial review against a number of public authorities.

Toby Cadman is a London-based barrister and an international law specialist in the field of international criminal and humanitarian law, international human rights law, extradition and mutual legal assistance, anti-corruption, whistleblower protection, business and human rights, international commercial law, arbitration and international climate justice law. Co-founder of The Guernica Group and Joint Head of Chambers at Guernica 37 International Justice Chambers, Toby also serves as Associate Counsel to The Guernica for International Justice.

Md Nazrul Islam is Professor of Political Studies at Shahjalal University of Science and Technology, Sylhet-3114, Bangladesh. He received PhD in Sociology at Nanyang Technological University, Singapore. He also did MSc in International Relations at S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), Nanyang Technological University, Singapore. Earlier, he completed master’s degree in Political Science at the University of Dhaka, Bangladesh. His works have appeared in various international peer-reviewed journals including International Area Studies Review; Bandung: Journal of the Global South; Religions; Journal for the Study of Religions and Ideologies; Social Sciences; Politics, Religion & Ideology; and Contemporary Islam He is the co-author of the book Islam and Democracy in South Asia: The Case of Bangladesh (Palgrave Macmillan, 2020). His most recent publication is ‘Faithful Participation: The ‘Ulama in Bangladeshi Politics’, Politics, Religion & Ideology 23:2 (2022): 177–203. Dr. Islam’s research interests include religion, politics and governance; democracy and political Islam; religion, environment and development; poor and marginalized communities; and Bangladesh studies.

Md Saidul Islam is Associate Professor and the Post-Graduate Coordinator of Sociology, Nanyang Technological University (NTU), Singapore. He’s also serving as an elected member of the NTU Senate. He did his MA and PhD from York University in Canada with Graduate Fellowship for Academic Distinction and received his bachelor’s degree in Sociology and Anthropology from International Islamic University Malaysia with the Royal Education Award. He’s a former Visiting Scholar of Massachusetts Institute of Technology and a research associate of the University of Nottingham Malaysia Campus. Dr. Islam’s research interests include international development and environmental sociology, and he has published seven books and over four dozen peer-reviewed journal articles and book chapters on these topics. He is the co-author of the book Islam and Democracy in South

Asia: The Case of Bangladesh (Palgrave Macmillan, 2020). As a top emerging scholar in sociology, he received the Early Investigator Award (Prix de jeune chercheuse ou chercheur) in 2015 from the Canadian Sociological Association (CSA). He is the past Chair of the Sociology of Development Cluster, CSA. He also taught at York University in Canada, the College of William and Mary in the United States, and Nankai University in China.

Syed Serajul Islam (PhD, McGill, Canada), a Canadian political scientist, is currently Professor in the Department of Political Science at Lakehead University, Canada. He taught at the University of Dhaka, McGill, Concordia, as well as universities in USA, Malaysia, Singapore, and many other countries. He has written nine books and more than 80 refereed articles. He is a member in the editorial boards of several international journals. Dr. Islam received several grants, including SRC and Fulbright Research grants. He received Lakehead’s 2008 Distinguished Researcher Award, the 2005 Contribution to Research Award, as well as the Merit Increment Award every two years. He is also recognized as one of the top 40 researchers at Lakehead University. Dr. Islam is a specialist in international politics, international law, global terrorism & security, global governance, international environmental sustainability, Asian and Third World politics, new public management & policy, and international political economy. Besides research, Dr. Islam received Lakehead’s 2009 Distinguished Instructor Award and 2005 Contribution to Teaching Award. In the TVO’s Best Lecturer competition 2008, Dr. Islam was selected as one of the best (top) 38 lecturers in all Ontario universities and colleges.

M. Moniruzzaman is Associate Professor in the Department of International Relations at the University of Sharjah, UAE. Earlier, he received his PhD from Nagoya University, Japan, and subsequently taught at Northern University Bangladesh and International Islamic University Malaysia, where he headed the department during 2013–2014. His research interests cover comparative politics, political economy of the Muslim world and Islamic political thought. He has published over 40 articles in journals such as Commonwealth and Comparative Politics, South Asian Survey, Journal of Economic Cooperation and Development, South Asian Development, Intellectual Discourse and Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs. Currently, he is working on a book entitled Minority at Home and Abroad: Islamic Theories of Minority Rights. He is a member of the American Political Science Association, the Association for Asian Studies, and the Asian Political Science Association. Apart from academic research, Moniruzzaman also publishes creative writings in his native Bengali language.

Dr. Abdullah M. Noman, PhD, CFP®, is Associate Professor of Finance in the Thomas College of Business and Economics at the University of North Carolina at Pembroke. He obtained his PhD from the University of New Orleans in Louisiana. Previously, he studied economics at the International

Islamic University, Islamabad, and finance at the University of Bristol, UK. He is Certified Financial Planner (CFP®) and is actively involved in Pro Bono financial advising. Dr. Noman’s research interest includes behavioural and personal finance, socially responsible investing and asset pricing. He has published in several academic journals, such as Review of Accounting and Finance, Journal of Risk and Financial Management, Journal of Financial Economic Policy, and Banking and Finance Review. His research has also been presented in several academic conferences, including Southwestern Finance Association, Southern Finance Association, Eastern Finance Association and Academy of Economics and Finance annual meetings.

Mohammad Nakibur Rahman is Associate Professor of Finance at the College of Business and Economics at the University of North Carolina at Pembroke. He received his PhD in Finance from the University of New Orleans. Dr. Rahman’s teaching interests span the areas of international finance, investment, financial management and entrepreneurial finance. His research interests include contemporary issues related to international business, technology, risk management, financial derivative and stock markets. He has authored and co-authored research papers that have been published in refereed journals and in the proceedings of national and international academic conferences. His publications have appeared in the Journal of Financial Economic Policy, Journal of Derivatives & Hedge Funds and Journal of International Business Research and Practice. Dr. Rahman has received research awards for several papers presented at national and regional academic conferences and chaired sessions and served as a discussant. Dr. Rahman’s latest book titled Doing Business in Chile and Peru: Challenges and Opportunities was published by Palgrave Macmillan.

Nazmus Sakib is Lecturer at the Lewis Honors College, University of Kentucky. He also has a secondary appointment as an assistant professor in the Department of Political Science at the same university and an associate faculty in the international studies programme. He holds an MA and a PhD in Political Science from Texas Tech University and an MSSc and a BSSc in Economics from the University of Dhaka. His primary field of research is international relations with an emphasis on the peace science tradition. His academic works have appeared in International Interactions, Politics and Policy, European Politics and Society, Foreign Policy Analysis (forthcoming) and other journals. His teaching and research interests include studying the causes of war and peace, international security, civil–military relations, immigration, foreign policy, etc. His public scholarship-oriented opinion pieces have appeared in Newsweek, Daily Sabah, Forbes, TRT World, the National Interest, OpenDemocracy, etc.

Jack Sproson is a Member of the Bar of England and Wales and a Member of G37 Chambers. Jack accepts instructions in all of Chambers’ practice areas, principally in public/private international law, international human rights

Law, international humanitarian law and international criminal law. As part of his international practice, Jack conducts litigation and supports individuals in matters before several international courts and tribunals, including, inter alia, the European Court of Human Rights, UN special procedures, the International Criminal Court and the Kosovo Specialist Chambers. He has supported several individuals in respect of their appeals against INTERPOL Red Notices and is an experienced practitioner in the area of business and human rights. He also has experience at the UN Mechanism for International Criminal Tribunals and in matters relating to the International Court of Justice. Jack has extensive expertise in humanitarian and legal issues pertaining to conflict- and climate-related insecurity and displacement in Africa and the Middle East, most recently as lead counsel for a major project advocating for the continuation of UN cross-border humanitarian access in Syria. He has previously published on the protection of human rights both domestically and internationally, including in works published by Bloomsbury Professional.

Anwarul Wadud is a distinguished educator and researcher. He obtained his PhD in Development Administration from the esteemed Philippine Christian University, where he focused on studying and understanding the intricacies of effective administration within development contexts. He earned a postdoctoral degree in Strategic Management and Leadership from the same university. He has actively engaged in research and has made significant contributions through his research publications and other scholarly works. At present, Dr. Wadud serves as a professor at the Graduate School of Jose Razol University in the Philippines, where he imparts his knowledge and experience to aspiring professionals. In addition to his role at Jose Razol University, Dr. Wadud is also a faculty member at the Graduate School of the Philippine Christian University. This dual position allows him to engage with a diverse range of students and contribute to developing academic programmes, fostering an environment of intellectual growth and exploration. He is a fellow of the prestigious Royal Society of Arts (RSA) in London, the United Kingdom, and the Royal Institution of Singapore, Singapore. These affiliations highlight his standing as a respected scholar and educator and his commitment to promoting excellence in education and research.

Acknowledgements

The Jamaat Question in Bangladesh was made possible by support from Lakehead University in Canada and Nanyang Technological University in Singapore. We would like to acknowledge our debts to these two great institutions of higher learning.

We are thankful to our contributors and reviewers who took this project seriously, especially Md Yousuf Ali, M. W. Islam, Md Mosharrof Hossain Shaikh, Bilkis Begum, Md Emdadul Islam, Muhammad Hedayatul Islam, Mahmudul Hasan and many more. We are grateful to the Routledge team—Simon Bates, Khin Thazin and Chelsea Low—for their diligent work, which included providing insightful comments, finding critical and constructive external reviews, and moving the project in a timely manner. We also thank Nageeb Gounjaria for his excellent copy editing.

Our friends and family members have been a constant source of encouragement and enthusiasm throughout our life, particularly during this study. We believe this work could not be made possible without the continued emotional support from our family members: our parents, siblings, children and our spouses. We would like to express our heartfelt thanks to them. We also say a big ‘thank you’ to all our friends, colleagues and well-wishers.

The contributors, not publisher and editors, are solely responsible for their views and analysis in this volume.

1 Jamaat Question in Post-Democratic Bangladesh

Md Saidul Islam

Introduction

Since 9/11, conversations about Islam, Muslims and Islam-based politics have gained renewed interest across the world, insomuch that it has become a pivotal factor in international relations. Following an increasingly securitized neoliberal order, this interest is, ironically, more pathological than genuine, shaped as it is by ‘a culture of fear and terror’. Besides becoming new ‘objects of analysis’, Islam, politics and Muslim societies have often been misrepresented through an amalgam of facts and fiction in order to create and then justify regimes of control, surveillance and interventions (Muscati 2003; Islam 2005, 2013). The study of Islam, politics and society in Bangladesh is no exception to this trend; hence, offering an objective analysis on these subjects through a rigorous investigation is no easy yet necessary task. With multidisciplinary insights and perspectives, this volume addresses this challenge through a series of contributions that speak to the complex intersection of global politics and local dynamics. While aiming to uncover facts from myths through an in-depth socio-historical analysis of Islam, politics and society in Bangladesh, the volume interrogates Bangladesh Jamaat-e-Islami (henceforth Jamaat), the largest Islam-based political party in Bangladesh with about 10% support base.1 It explores whether a plural yet cohesive national narrative for peaceful coexistence is possible for Bangladesh, which is perpetually mired in political tensions and violence.

Originally established in 1941 by Maulana Sayyid Abul ‘Ala Maududi (1903–1979), a South Asian Islamic revivalist in British India, Jamaat morphed into an independent political party after Bangladesh gained independence in 1971 (Amin 2016; Banu 1994). For disagreeing with some secular ideals and supporting the idea of a united Pakistan during the war of Bangladesh’s liberation in 1971, Jamaat’s positions and roles have always been a subject of heated debate in Bangladesh politics. Despite its participation in and contribution to most democratic and social justice movements in Bangladesh since independence (Islam, Önder, and Nyadera 2020), Jamaat is detested by a large segment of people in Bangladesh (Mostofa 2021; Fahim 2022). An upsurge of the so-called Shahbag Movement, backed by the current BAL (Bangladesh

DOI: 10.4324/9781003310679-1

Awami League) regime, erupted in 2013; they called for a total extermination of Jamaat from Bangladesh (Parvez 2022). Thereafter, the top five leaders of Jamaat were hanged for their alleged crimes against humanity during the war of liberation in 1971. Since then, an unofficial ban was imposed on Jamaat with a massive crackdown on its activists and social institutions, and the party wasn’t allowed to participate in subsequent national elections (Al Jazeera 2013). Various reports estimate thus:

[O]ver 35,000 cases have so far been instituted against more than 7,500,000 Jamaat leaders and workers across the country. . ., though the current internal report by BJI showed that in 2020, the individual cases instituted against more than three hundred thousand Jamaat members where about ten thousand members are in the prison.

(Islam, Önder, and Nyadera 2020, 294)

Interestingly, despite the consequent loss of its business and social institutions, Jamaat remains very active in the social landscape of Bangladesh (Amin 2016; Islam, Önder, and Nyadera, 2020). The questions arise: What makes Jamaat a political nemesis of the current BAL regime? How does Jamaat remain resilient despite tremendous repression, discrimination and scrutiny from the ruling regime? Admittedly, while many movements within and beyond Bangladesh have resorted to various forms of extremism, sometimes in the name of religion, by and large Jamaat propagates and upholds moderation and tolerance, adherence to the rule of law and democratic principles (Amin 2016).

The resilience of Jamaat in the face of hostility and repression, its distinct place in liberal democracies and debates surrounding it, and its controversial role in 1971 and ramifications in post-independent Bangladesh comprise what I call ‘the Jamaat Question’. I use this phrase because, to some extent, it echoes what Kazemipur (2014) has framed as the ‘the Muslim Question’ in the context of Canadian multiculturalism. While Canada is portrayed as a model of successful integration, Muslims in Canada are often perceived as ‘different’ and unwilling to integrate. This ‘difference’ is not presented as a simple marker of cultural diversity; it is often branded with inferiority and negativity by the dominant discourse. At the heart of the Jamaat question lies a perception of an uneasy relationship between Jamaat and the rest (mainly the dominant secular discourse), its place in independent Bangladesh and the future of political Islam in the neoliberal world order.

Representation of Jamaat in the Dominant Discourse

Why has Jamaat been largely misunderstood, grossly hated and politically demonized, especially by the ruling regime and its cultural and intellectual allies? The answer to this question lies, in part, in the discursive formation of national identity as well as the historical representation of Jamaat in the dominant discourse in Bangladesh. The national identity of Bangladesh in

the post-1971 era has been shaped not only by some political ideologies such as secularism and communism but also by erecting an ‘other’ against which the nation could articulate its future progress. With less than 1% support base in the then East Pakistan, Jamaat was only a tiny fraction among many other political parties and factions supporting a united Pakistan. However, being on the wrong side of history, it was expediently framed as the ‘other’ in the postliberation national identity of Bangladesh. This is not an experience unique to Jamaat or third-world politics; formation of national identity in the West also followed almost the same modus operandi by constructing a convenient ‘other’. French national identity, for example, was formed in reaction to Protestantism, and British identity in opposition to Roman Catholicism (Marx 2003). Kazemipur (2014, 21) aptly explains the genesis of this otherness:

Historically, such processes were often triggered when something managed to undermine a country’s shared national identity. As soon as it appears as though an “us-versus-them” will be useful, people start looking for a group that can be transformed into a “them”, against which a “we” can shape itself. Sometimes this other is another country; but, more frequently, it is comprised of religious minorities within the same country (this being a less costly alternative).

In the context of post-liberation anti-Pakistani and anti-Islamic secular and communist ideologies and pro-Indian geopolitical realities, Jamaat appears as a ‘religious minority’ representing Islam in the political landscape amid a Muslim majority Bangladesh (Islam 2011b); hence, it conveniently served as the ‘other’ in the official discourse of identity formation. This otherness was constructed through at least three conspicuous routes: (a) problematization (producing knowledge in order to construct Jamaat as a ‘national problem’ to deal with, a potential enemy to fight against, a possible adversary to blame for all national owes, and an easy and less costly ‘trash bin’ to externalize and dump in all the national failures); (b) institutionalization (releasing new discoveries and concoction of knowledge from powerful public and private institutions to ‘represent’, while denying the agency of, Jamaat through mechanisms of, for example, bureaucratization and managerialism); and (c) normalization of power (in which people accept these discursive constructions of, and new concoction of, knowledge about Jamaat as ‘truths’ without any protest or scrutiny and eventually feel obliged to hate Jamaat for both mental solace and national progress). This is how Michel Foucault (1979, 1986) explicates the relations and exercise of power in modern society, a process that he terms ‘governmentality’. The techniques of this discursive formation of otherness in post-liberation Bangladesh through ‘rationalization’—in which power remains uncontested and subjectivity is effectively created—are what I call ‘the Jamaatgovernmentality’. One apparent implication of this governmentality is privileging certain actors while marginalizing others (Escobar 1995); one entity becomes a sole authority to construct ‘realities’ that are taken seriously and

acted upon, while the other entity is denied equal degrees or kinds of agency (Doty 1996).

Central to the otherizing relationship between Jamaat and the rest is the politics and practices of representation of Jamaat in the dominant pro-liberation secularist discourse in Bangladesh, which is comprised mostly of pro-Indian Bengali nationalists, policy makers, politicians, scholars, journalists and others (Fahim 2022; Islam 2021). By representation, I mean the ways in which the dominant discourse has discursively represented Jamaat, designating them as patients to be diagnosed, examined, studied, problematized and surveilled. It does not refer to ‘truth’ and ‘knowledge’ that the dominant discourse has discovered and amassed about Jamaat but rather to the ways in which regimes of ‘truth’ and ‘knowledge’ have been produced and constructed so as to justify and normalize governance and interventions over Jamaat. This regime of representation can be analysed as, to quote Arturo Escobar, ‘places of encounter where identities are constructed and also where violence is organized, symbolized, and managed’ (1995, 10). This is akin to what Chandra Mohanty (1991) calls ‘the colonialist move’ to construct colonial subjects in ways that justify the exercise of power over them. The predominant strategic function is, to quote Homi Bhabha (1990, 75), ‘the creation of a space for ‘subject peoples’ through the production of knowledge in terms of which surveillance is exercised and a complex form of pleasure/unpleasure is incited’. This representation is hegemonic since it blocks all other forms of knowledge and other models of knowing (Islam 2005, 2013). It erodes in a deeper manner Jamaat’s ability to define itself and chart its own future. In other words, Jamaat is represented not by itself but by its worst critics and political nemesis.

Due to these politics and practices of representation of Jamaat, when the pro-Indian Bengali nationalists (academics, journalists and left-wing civil society) talk or write about it, they do not do it from a position of neutrality; on the contrary, they approach it from a deep psychological reality of bias, something they are not willing to acknowledge ( Jalil 2010; Islam, Önder, and Nyadera 2020). This is nothing but a ‘clash of ignorance’ in which opinion is formed and judgement on Jamaat is produced through pure prejudice and sheer rhetoric based on utter ignorance (Islam 2011a, 2011b). By ignorance, I do not mean that they do not know about Jamaat but that they are either hesitant or unwilling to acknowledge anything positive about Jamaat. It is not about knowing but sheer incapacity to appreciate the difference. Therefore, when Bengali nationalists talk or write about Jamaat in the mainstream media, they stereotype and caricature in the most racist fashion (Fahim 2022). Taking an erroneous cherry-picking approach, they erect a strawman version of Jamaat that they can easily beat down and then accuse its leaders of the crimes that they themselves are often guilty of. The dominant discourse in Bangladesh can be likened to a factory that endlessly churns out guilt that Jamaat is expected to carry forward from generation to generation. However, branding Jamaat as razakars (who collaborated with the Pakistani army in 1971) is inherently misleading. The image of the pro-Pakistani Jamaat cherishing a

nostalgic past with united Pakistan is a myth that most current Jamaat leaders and activists do not subscribe to after 51 years of Bangladesh’s independence. This inaccurate, misleading and stereotyped cultural representation of Jamaat has sadly crept into academia, where a biased perception hinders a true understanding of Jamaat. Although the academic treatment of Jamaat is surprisingly scant, whatever meagre academic literature is available has been contaminated by the politics and practices of representation of Jamaat by the dominant Bengali nationalist discourse in Bangladesh. The academics are, to a large extent, associated with, and not completely disconnected from, the system of political power and discourse. They have effectively collaborated with the political and cultural establishments to advance the construction of Jamaat’s image through negative stereotypes rather than problematizing the construction itself. Right from the start, most studies on Jamaat have been carried out through the lens of hate rather than open-mindedness, subjective judgement rather than objectivity, and using a cherry-picking approach rather than a holistic and comprehensive methodology. Edward Said’s ‘orientalism’ (Said 1979) is manifest in Bangladesh, albeit in different form. When pro-Indian journalists, politicians and cultural groups accuse Jamaat of sensuality (rape, nakedness and filth) and violence which they themselves are responsible for, they assume themselves to be free of those crimes. Indeed, they are not doing this from a neutral point of view; their negative construction is aimed at justifying intervention, invasion and emasculation of Jamaat by the state authority and state-supported entities. The past three decades of the brutal physical crackdown and massive cultural genocide of Jamaat in Bangladesh is a clear testimony (Islam 2011b; Islam, Önder, and Nyadera 2020; Fahim 2022).

Jamaat in Post-Democratic Bangladesh

Although Bangladesh has had a tumultuous past and diverse experiences with different forms of totalitarian regimes since 1971, the nation—following credible elections held under neutral caretaker governments—has relished democracy under at least three successive periods from 1991 to 2006. The post-2014 era of Bangladesh, however, has witnessed a complete U-turn from democracy, rule of law and political pluralism. Not surprisingly, this period is widely known as the post-democratic era in Bangladesh. Led by BAL under the leadership of Sheikh Hasina, the country has moved towards not only totalitarianism, but also, eclipsing and surpassing previous records, a kleptocratic fascism (Khan, Husain, and Chowdhury 2022). The rise of this new form of kleptocracy is accompanied by a repressive response using brute force against democratic norms, rule of law and political pluralism. Jamaat, along with the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP), became the ultimate victim of state repression. Decades-long discursive constructions and negative stereotyping of Jamaat have been consistently and systematically used by the state authority to justify its oppression of this religious political party.

The false representation of Jamaat by the dominant pro-Indian Bengali nationalist secular discourse was driven by what The Economist (2010) calls the ‘politics of hate’. Followers of Jamaat and its student wing Bangladesh Islami Chhatra Shibir (Islamic Student Association of Bangladesh, henceforth Shibir) almost overnight were turned into pariahs, if not ostracized species and alien creatures. Stripped of their liberty, freedom and human dignity, they were subjected to others’ contempt, hatred, exclusions, and various forms of symbolic and physical violence. Symbolic violence was meted out to Jamaat through various means; for example, the publication of caricatured images of Jamaat leaders in newspapers, endless portrayal of Jamaat as the ultimate villain in cultural shows such as dramas and movies, and provocative speeches against Jamaat in almost every single political gathering of the ruling regime in Bangladesh. This violence eventually generated a deep-seated hatred with the intention to contain, suppress and exterminate Jamaat from the political and social landscape of Bangladesh. As symbolic violence justifies physical violence, followers of Jamaat and Shibir not only faced gross discrimination in educational institutions and job markets, but they were all too often objects of violence, torture and sometimes gruesome murder (Almamun 2020; Petersen, Ellis, and Rahman 2023). Beating or torturing a Shibir supporter in educational institutions by rival pro-Indian political factions such as Bangladesh Chhatra League (BCL), the student wing of BAL, became commonplace; it is often regarded as an anger-management mechanism not only to extinguish smouldering discontent against Jamaat-Shibir but also to gain mental solace and pleasure as well as eventual promotion in political careers (Khan, Husain, and Chowdhury 2022). As reported in the 2009 Human Rights Report: Bangladesh (US Department of State 2010), the regime created a reign of terror throughout the country wherein wild political vendetta, the setup of torture cells in educational institutions to torture and kill political opponents, rapes, mounting violence and murders became a common phenomenon since 2007.

For being perceived as a ‘Shibir supporter’, Abrar Fahad was tortured to death at the Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology (BUET) on 7 October 2019. A similar fate awaited four Shibir activists on 28 October 2016: they were beaten to death with boat oars, with the perpetrators dancing gleefully on their dead bodies in broad daylight. These are just two of many examples of a wild paradox: extinction of anger and hate and fulfilment of ecstasy. This wild paradox is manifested in and expressed through a daily slogan chanted in most higher educational institutions in Bangladesh: ‘ekta shibir dhor, sokal bikal nasta kor’ (grab Shibir one by one, kill them, and eat [them] as snacks in the morning and afternoon). When Shibir followers occasionally fight back for their survival, their actions are immediately condemned as ‘religious extremism’ by the armies of proIndian newspapers often acting in collusion with the US-led war on terror. Born in 1977, Shibir is a post-1971 generation; nevertheless, merely due to its association with Jamaat, it is often derided as ‘razakars’. Their normal religious practices, which in the West are the fundamental rights of every citizen, are constructed as ‘jongi’ (violence motivated by religion) while

Jamaat Question in Post-Democratic Bangladesh 7 their usual religious texts are presented as ‘jihadi’ books as if they were waging a holy war against the regime. Romanticization, exaggeration and discursive linkage of the Jamaat with the ‘terrorists’ are among the ploys of the state authorities, which are known as the ‘Jongification of Islamic political parties’ (Islam 2011b):

At the very beginning an aggressive attempt was taken by the current regime to link the Islamic political parties with militancy ( jongi). A massive propaganda was launched by some ministers and some media portals at home and abroad to brand Bangladesh as a ‘Jongi State’, perhaps to woo the Superpowers who are hostile to Islam and thereby to earn an unequivocal support for the regime’s action against Islamic political forces.

(p. 128)

Along with razakarization and jongification (Islam 2011b), the representation of Jamaat in the dominant discourse creates a ‘political pathology’ in which Jamaat is blamed for all national woes and failures. Here, Jamaat is treated not only as a ‘trash-bin’ to dump in or externalize all the social odds and problems, but it is also used as a ‘semantic cover’ to displace and occlude the major issues and problems of the nation such as the deficit in democracy, poor governance, endemic corruption, grinding poverty and pervasive inequality. These major problems facing the nation are therefore of little or no importance to the regime compared to opposing and emasculating Jamaat.

This blame syndrome is both occluding and deceiving on one hand and reductionist and essentialist on the other. The main purpose is basically to hide the regime’s corrupted face and divert the people’s attention from the actual perpetrators to a fake and constructed adversary.

(Islam 2022, xix)

It works in two interesting ways: destruction through distraction, and distraction through destruction. Destruction of Jamaat-led social institutions such as hospitals, schools and business centres through violence, not to mention looting and plundering by the ruling regime, is often carried out and justified through distracting people’s attention from the actual perpetrators to the constructed adversary. Thus, blaming the victims and sanctifying the oppressor becomes not only an acceptable but also a desired modus operandi by the dominant discourse and the ruling regime. Distraction through destruction is applied when the nation faces some severe setbacks such as natural disasters or political scandals or serious social upheavals that have potential political ramifications. People’s distraction from these setbacks is usually made through blaming Jamaat, demolishing its institutional apparatuses, mass arrest and using it as a bogeyman. Amid unprecedented symbolic and physical violence, Jamaat seems to remain defiant and resilient in the social, even if less so in the political, landscapes of Bangladesh.

Approach of the Book

With substantial background on Islam, politics and society in Bangladesh, the book sketches out the central theme, that is, ‘the Jamaat Question’: Why is Jamaat so resilient despite tremendous repression, discrimination and scrutiny by the ruling regime? How does Jamaat negotiate between its questionable past in 1971 and its call for positive social change in post-independent Bangladesh? Where and how do we situate Jamaat in the liberal democracies and the neoliberal world order? To address these critical questions of our time, this volume takes a non-partisan, objective approach with analytical rigour, making it suitable for both the academic community and the general readers. It brings ‘the Jamaat question’ in Bangladesh politics into a wider discursive, analytical narrative in order to take the debate a step further. As alluded to earlier, there is hardly any academic work on Jamaat based on an impartial and objective investigation; therefore, a well-researched academic book on this Islamist party is a crying need. Realizing this apparent gap in the literature, over the past five years, the editors approached dozens of well-established scholars in this field across the world to come up with this exclusive project. The volume, therefore, intends to make a novel, substantial and sustained intellectual and academic contribution to the field.

Drawing powerful insights from the literature on governmentality and orientalism, the volume seeks to problematize and deconstruct the decades-long discursive formation and pervasive stereotypes of Jamaat. Since the question of Jamaat is relatively new in the literature, therefore, the volume may generate controversies and some potential backlashes. Some readers may even find materials in this volume ‘politically biased’. This is not unlikely, given that the ‘Jamaat Question’ is highly controversial and misunderstood in Bangladesh after decades of sustained negative propaganda and political persecution (Almamun 2020; Fahim 2022). Third-world politics in the post-9/11 context further complicated the situation. However, as the editors are committed, the objective of this volume is to extract facts from fiction using ‘multi-disciplinary insights and perspectives’. It’s certainly a challenge to ‘show’ objectivity when both the people and intellectuals are sharply divided on this topic.

Since the Jamaat issue is both controversial and misunderstood and the public opinion is sharply and often antagonistically divided, the question of ‘objectivity’ may remain a perennial issue. Because of Jamaat’s controversial role in 1971 in opposing the separation of East Pakistan (now Bangladesh) from West Pakistan (now Pakistan), the party was subjected to political persecution and negative propaganda. The upshot is that people tend to view the party from the retrogressive and reductionist lens of 1971. As explained before, thanks to the collusion of ‘the politics of hate’ with post-9/11 geopolitics, a strong anti-Jamaat discourse has been constructed by the ruling regime and its cultural and intellectual allies. As the people and intellectuals are sharply divided on the Jamaat question, the project has a clear objective to delve deeply into the issue at hand and extricate facts from fiction using

some of the established social science methodologies such as discourse analysis and deconstruction. Due to the editors’ commitment to maintaining academic rigour, the book may sometimes appear pro-Jamaat, and at other times antiJamaat. The main focus here is to maintain an impartial and non-partisan stance in addressing the subject matter, and then leaving it to the readers to make their own judgement. In order for the book to come from a perspective of open-minded investigation rather than political propaganda, the editors approached a bunch of well-established intellectuals in the field across the world and invited them to write the chapters. Again, to maintain academic rigour and objectivity, the editors ensured that each and every chapter was peer-reviewed and cross-checked before the final submission.

Organization of the Chapters

Before delving into the Jamaat Question, there is a need to provide sufficient background on Islam, politics and society in Bangladesh. Chapter 2 ‘Emergence of Islam and the Formation of Muslim Society in Bangladesh’ serves this purpose. This chapter posits that Islamization and the for mation of Muslim societies around the world can be explained by several theories: the force theory, social liberation theory, patronization theory and immigration theory. By critically engaging with these theories, this chapter explains the rise of Islam and the formation of Muslim society in Bangladesh. In effect, it shows that Islam emerged in Bengal/East Bengal/East Pakistan (which is now Bangladesh) long before the political conquest of the country by Muslims. Arab Muslim merchants, missionaries and preachers were the primary agents engaged in peaceful missionary activities that eventually resulted in a majority Muslim population and the development of an overwhelmingly Muslim society in Bengal/East Bengal. The Muslim conquest of the territory was expedited through Muslim migration from abroad and other parts of India to Bengal.

Chapter 3 provides a succinct account of the politics of Islam in Bangladesh and the role of Jamaat. It explains how Islam has been exploited in the Muslim world as a means of extending authority and earning legitimacy rather than giving true meaning to its principles. In Bangladesh, the regimes have consistently used Islam to secure legitimacy being fully aware of the grip of religion on people’s lives, identity and social consciousness. Indeed, each regime has successfully manoeuvred the minds of the Muslims during periods of crisis because they know that Islam is the moral compass guiding beliefs and behaviour in the country. Not surprisingly, despite more than half a century of colonial rule, Islam is as alive in Bangladesh today as it was in the past. In this chapter, an attempt is made to examine the questions: Why and how has Islam been used? Why does Islam still hold sway in the politics of Bangladesh? How has Jamaat, among other Islamic institutions, kept Islam alive in the society and politics of Bangladesh? To answer these questions, this chapter explores the inextricable relationship between Islam and politics.

Chapter 4, ‘Jamaat and Shibir: From Islamic Revolutionaries to Ideal Citizens’, investigates how the idea of Islamic revolution has evolved and to some extent been purged from the discourse, vocabulary and practice of Jamaat and Shibir in the post-9/11 era. This chapter argues that the horrific 9/11 attacks and the subsequent unending war on terror pushed Jamaat and its student wing Shibir to recalibrate and finetune their image. This resulted in the adoption of more moderate vernaculars in the party constitutions while expunging words and discourses that could hint at bad Muslimness or closeness to terrorism. Using Jamaat and Shibir literature, constitutions and interviews with the leadership, this chapter demonstrates that the turn from the Islamic revolutionary worldview to a more civil-democratic image to fit neatly into the moderate Muslim category—one that is tolerable and attractive to the West— is one of Jamaat and Shibir’s ways of coping with and responding to the overpowering threat of the war on terror as well as mounting domestic pressures.

Chapter 5, ‘Jamaat and Democracy: Constitutionalism, Electoral Politics and Complacency’, assesses Jamaat’s democratic role in Bangladesh politics. It argues that Jamaat’s democratic credentials are overshadowed by some major shortcomings that call into question its institutional framework. First, in spite of maintaining a consistent position on constitutionalism and competitive electoral democracy since its registration as a party in 1979 in independent Bangladesh, Jamaat has failed to present a more modern, rational and adaptable framework of the Islamic state that goes beyond its traditional dogmatic/ static views. Second, despite remaining arguably a highly democratic party in the context of Bangladesh, Jamaat has failed to resolve its legitimacy crisis that originated in its position on and role in the liberation war of Bangladesh. This failure can be attributed to its leadership complacency and its internal party-orthodoxy. And third, Jamaat has remained excessively bound by idealistic orthodoxy, which prevented it from developing a popular electorate base, thereby failing to popularize itself as a democratic force. For these three reasons, this chapter contends that Jamaat still remains a political outcast in the context of realpolitik in Bangladesh.

Chapter 6 adumbrates the political progress of Jamaat through social welfare, with a focus on its contribution to education and healthcare. Since its inception in the Indian subcontinent in 1941, one of Jamaat’s focal points has been its social welfare programmes. While the ultimate success or failure of Jamaat in Bangladesh is still unknown, the influence and significance that this party currently holds in the country’s political and religious spheres cannot be underestimated. Since Bangladesh was set up five decades ago, Jamaat has been developing a complex organizational structure that provides social welfare to the needy. This chapter argues that Jamaat, through its religiously motivated social welfare programme, has been exercising parallel state functionality. This has played a subliminal yet significant role in cementing its status as a religious political party in Bangladesh. Through an analysis of empirical data gathered via semi-structured interviews, the chapter demonstrates that Jamaat in Bangladesh was able to make political gains, thanks, in large measure, to its social welfare programmes, more concretely its educational and medical welfare

Question in Post-Democratic Bangladesh 11 activities. This indicates its success in the opportunistic utilization of the political structure in Bangladeshi society.

Chapter 7 reveals the story behind the emergence of Islami Bank Bangladesh Limited (IBBL) and the role of Jamaat. It maintains that the success and prosperity of the bank can be attributed to the dedication and conviction of its employees, many with a background in the Jamaat organization. In line with their core beliefs to promote social welfare, Jamaat members built institutions such as hospitals, schools, relief organizations and businesses, among which IBBL became the most impactful establishment. IBBL has been a leader in the finance and welfare industry, with an impressive track record in both deposits and investments. The bank has also made remarkable contributions to education, healthcare and the welfare of marginalized groups through its Rural Development Scheme and Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) initiatives. Unfortunately, in 2017, a change in the ownership and management of IBBL with direct interference of the BAL regime led to massive corruption and caused the bank to reverse course in terms of performance.

Chapter 8, ‘Treatment of Jamaat and Shibir in Post-Democratic Bangladesh’, investigates the state and practice of democracy and grave violation of human rights with a focus on the treatment of Jamaat in post-democratic Bangladesh. After the BAL regime ascended to power in early 2009, the party leader Sheikh Hasina didn’t take long to launch a countrywide witch hunt. Violent attacks on opposition parties’ peaceful rallies and gatherings, the judicial killing of opposition leaders, crossfires, enforced disappearances, arrests and tortures of the opposition activists became a regular scenario. Another noteworthy trend was the forced closure, occupation, seizure or arson of opposition activists’ houses, offices and properties, not to mention an unprecedented attack on print media and electronic media channels and journalists. While rape, gang rape and murder after rape were normalized and access to justice was denied, corruption reached epidemic proportions as state funds were looted. This chapter details how thousands of people—including former high-rank military and law enforcement personnel as well as Jamaat-Shibir activists—were arrested, tortured, killed or kidnapped by the government forces during the period of 2009 to 2014. BAL’s political vendetta and oppression continue unabated to date.

Chapter 9 examines the execution of Jamaat leaders by the International Crimes Tribunal Bangladesh (ICTB) for alleged heinous crimes committed in the Liberation War of Bangladesh in 1971. Although the ICTB claimed indisputable proof of Jamaat leaders’ involvement in committing heinous crimes in 1971 as collaborators with the Pakistani Army, they failed to establish beyond reasonable doubt Jamaat leaders’ direct involvement in perpetrating any crimes during the War. This chapter first analyses the historical background in the formation of the ICTB. It then examines the exact role of Jamaat and its leaders in the Liberation War to determine which label is more fitting for the executed Jamaat leaders: national villain or fallen heroes. Third, it examines the overall trial process of ICTB, looking at its legal merits and demerits in applying domestic and international criminal law standards, which

are crucial when implementing death sentences of the accused in a criminal tribunal. Fourth, several international, internationalized and domestic criminal tribunals’ jurisprudences are examined to evaluate whether the ICTB correctly applied international criminal law standards when prosecuting Jamaat leaders. The chapter closes with a critical discussion on whether Jamaat leaders were victims of ‘political killing’ or if they actually committed atrocious offences in 1971 that justify the punishment meted out to them.

Chapter 10, ‘The International Crimes Tribunal, Bangladesh: Courting Controversy’, provides an in-depth analysis from a legal point of view. Following the nine-month War of Liberation in 1971, the People’s Republic of Bangladesh emerged from a brutal conflict as an independent, albeit broken, state. Undoubtedly, some of those who engaged in conflict, on all sides, committed acts that constitute war crimes and crimes against humanity—crimes of an ‘international character’ on a truly horrific scale. In 1973, the International Commission of Jurists advocated for the creation of an international tribunal. The Tribunal was established in March 2010 and the Executive appointed the Judges, Prosecutors and Investigators. There was no independent judicial commission, and this was far from a transparent process. Many of the judges and prosecutors were closely aligned to the politics of the ruling BAL party and have engaged in what can only be described as prosecutorial and judicial misconduct that amounts to a conspiracy to pervert the course of justice. What follows is an account of the circumvention of the rule of law by the national authorities to use justice as a political tool of retribution, and where Bangladesh goes from here. Where should Jamaat go from here? Is political pluralism in Bangladesh a thing of the past or are there still spaces for peaceful coexistence? Is the annihilation of Jamaat from the political and social landscapes of Bangladesh the only viable solution, as the actions of the current regime seem to imply?

Chapter 11, ‘Jamaat and Bangladesh: Towards a Cohesive Narrative’, concludes this study by addressing these central and critical questions of our time. A strong discourse, largely orchestrated by the current BAL regime, is now in place, where a discursive binary opposition has been constructed between Jamaat and the rest such that survival of one increasingly depends on the emasculation and annihilation of the other. This sort of intra-inflicting discourse must be deconstructed, subverted and reconstructed into a cohesive narrative for Bangladesh where political pluralism, democratic principles, rule of law, and social cohesion with peace and harmony thrive and take a strong root. There is no doubt that the ‘Jamaat Question’ in Bangladesh will have strong and broader implications for other conflicting Muslim and non-Muslim states across the world.

Note

1 While no credible census is available to determine the exact suppor t base of any political party in Bangladesh, multiple estimations exist based on different facts and figures. In case of Jamaat, the support base ranges from 5 to 25%. The 5% figure is

Another random document with no related content on Scribd:

A S, M A

Arnold Schoenberg, born in Vienna (1874), taught himself until he was twenty. He then studied with Alexander von Zemlinsky, who later became his brother-in-law. Zemlinsky once pointed him out saying, “He is in his early twenties and I have taught him all I know; he brought me an orchestral work recently for which he had to paste two pieces of score paper together to write out his score, so large an orchestra had he employed!” This was his tone poem, Pelleas and Melisande, first performed in 1904. To this early period belong some songs, a song cycle with orchestra on texts by Jens Peter Jacobsen, Gurrelieder, and the sextet, Verklärte Nacht (Illumined Night).

Both Richard Strauss and Gustav Mahler were his friends, and through Mahler’s efforts many of his compositions were performed. His string quartet was played in America by the Flonzaley Quartet. His Chamber Symphony, and his second string quartet, with solo voice, performed (1924) at the Berkshire Chamber Music Festival, belong to this same period.

So far, all that Schoenberg composed was based more or less on models of the past, but being naturally an anarchist in music he tried to escape from doing what others had done. Instead of writing works that took fifty minutes to play like his string quartet (in one movement), he wrote five orchestral pieces and piano pieces that were mere suggestions of compositions, so short were they. He cut out all development of themes, all old forms, all feeling for tonality, writing in the twelve-tone scale which we explained as atonality; he built his chords in intervals of fourths instead of thirds, and purposely changed all the rules of harmony; he distorted all the intervals, using a seventh or ninth instead of the octave, and making every fourth and fifth a half step larger or smaller than was customary. His melodies are marked by large skips and queer intervals, but when one once knows his language, by its very queerness, it is easily recognized as Schoenberg’s. Although he has broken away from the slavery of old traditions, he may have “jumped out of the frying-pan into the fire”!

In Pierrot Lunaire, a cycle of twenty-one songs with chamber music accompaniment, he uses a curious effect for the voice “which must be neither sung nor spoken.” This same effect he uses in chorus in his music drama, Die Glückliche Hand (The Lucky Hand) for which he also wrote the libretto. Although this and another music drama Erwartung (The Awaiting) were begun in 1909, they were both performed for the first time in 1924 in Vienna. This long delay was due to the prejudice against the work of this innovator, who on the one hand has been laughed at, scorned, and reviled, and on the other praised to the skies by a small group of disciples and imitators whose works sound very much like their teacher’s.

Among these pupils are Egon Wellesz (1885) who more than the other disciples has broken away from the master. He has gone his way in writing music for the stage and combining the old ideas of ballet and orchestral music with Greek drama in a modern dance drama. He has also written interesting chamber and orchestral music. Dr. Wellesz is also an authority on musical history; he has written many books and articles on the subject, especially on early opera, Byzantine and Oriental music. He has written a book on Schoenberg (1921).

Alban Berg (1885), also a Schoenberg pupil, has written unusually fine chamber music and a new opera, Wozzek, fragments of which were played at a festival in Prague (Czecho-Slovakia) in May, 1925, by the International Society of Contemporary Music, a movement most valuable in encouraging and developing modern music. This society holds yearly meetings in Europe, at which are heard the works of all the young composers of the world, each country having a branch, which sends its share of new works to make the festival’s programs.

Others of the Schoenberg group are Anton von Webern (1883), Paul Pisk, Karl Horovitz (1884–1925), Ernest Krenek, and Ernest Toch (1887).

E K

Erich Wolfgang Korngold (1898) startled the musical world, just before the War, by the astonishing compositions he wrote as a little boy. Among these were orchestral works and a piano sonata of extraordinary promise. He was born in Vienna and is the son of a musician and musical critic. Young Korngold is known in America as the composer of Die Todte Stadt (The Dead City) an opera in which the soprano, Maria Jeritza, made her first appearance at the Metropolitan Opera House. In many ways the opera goes back to the old pre-Wagner form and is full of melody, unusual in a young 20th century composer! He has written other operas bordering on the lighter Viennese operetta and has kept away from the Schoenberg influence.

M G M

Richard Strauss was the last of the great classic school of German composers, which for two hundred years had led the world in music. Curious as it seems, he has not influenced directly the younger composers, who turned to Debussy, Busoni, Schoenberg and Stravinsky. (Page 410.)

B G

Ferruccio Busoni (1866–1924) although an Italian, had a strong influence in two fields of German music, that of piano playing and composing. He lived in Berlin and was one of the brilliant thinkers and musicians of the period. He left chamber music and orchestral works, also several operas, one of which, The Harlequin, finished just before his untimely death, combines traditional form with radical ideas. His sonatinas for piano and a set of studies on American Indian Themes are important. He made a deep study of all methods, old and new, and gave his pupils the advantage of this wide experience.

Although the young Germans are not copying the huge symphonic form of Bruckner and Mahler, these two have gained greatly in popularity and are serving as models. Hans Pfitzner (1869), opera composer, is one of the most German of the living composers of the pre-war period; Franz Schreker (1878), an Austrian, living in Berlin, has taught many of the younger composers. He writes operas and songs. Schoenberg, although in Vienna, is felt even in Berlin.

H

Of the young Germans, Paul Hindemith is the most important. He was born in 1895 and according to Riemann, “is the freshest and most full-blooded talent among the younger German composers.” He seems to satisfy the two factions, for he is not too radical for the Old or too old-fashioned for the New, so as Lawrence Gilman says, “he carries water on both shoulders.... He seems to be able to write polytonally or atonally if he chooses, and also to write as the Academics might observe, like a gentleman. Richard Strauss is reported to have said to him: ‘Why do you write atonally when you have talent?’”

Today he is viola player in the Amar Quartet, but he has played in cafés, in the “movies,” dance halls, operetta theatres, and jazz bands! Although only thirty, he has many chamber music pieces to his credit and three dramatic works. His success has been tremendous.

A society to further an interest in the new music was founded by Hermann Scherchen and Eduard Erdmann. Scherchen created a sensation in Berlin just before the war by conducting Schoenberg’s Pierrot Lunaire, and after having been a prisoner of war in Russia he came back with renewed purpose of bringing the new music to the public. He has published a few songs and a string quartet. His righthand man Erdmann, besides being a pianist, has written a symphony, the first attempt of a youth without orchestral experience, which astonished the audience as a combination of Richard Strauss, Schoenberg, “to which is added a portion of genuine Erdmann flavor,” says Hugo Leichtentritt.

Another young German is Heinz Tiessen (1887), who is writing besides piano music in atonality, incidental music to a drama by Hauptman, and songs.

Philipp Jarnach (1892), a pupil of Busoni, Spanish by birth, educated in Paris, lives in Berlin and writes in the new style. Kurt Weill (1900) is also a gifted Busoni-ite.

Ernst Toch (1887), Viennese by birth, who lives in Germany has written string quartets, sonatas, concertos, and a symphony.

Heinrich Kaminsky is accepted in Germany as the composer who is trying to build a bridge from Bach to modern times. His Concerto Grosso for double orchestra commands great respect.

Béla Bartók (1881) and his friend Soltan Kodály (1882) have done much to bring Hungarian folk music into the modern world, for they are steeped in folk tunes, which they use with skill and imagination. Bartók has written a short opera, two ballets, orchestral works, string quartets, violin sonata, and many piano compositions. His children’s pieces are delightful, based as they are on Hungarian folk tunes.

We have spoken at length of the gypsy music of the Hungarians brought to us by Brahms, Liszt and Sarasate (violinist and composer). We also told you that the Hungarians were Magyars. Adjoran Otvos, in the League of Composers Review says: “Bartók and Kodály have accomplished a pioneer work of quite a different nature, an exploration into the folk music of Hungary which has yielded a collection of historic significance, the most important and only authentic one made in that country.

“Bartók, poor and supported only by a scholarship, started in 1905, an investigation of the music of his race. Spending a week with a friend in the country, he heard a servant, while at work, singing a tune quite different from the hybrid (mixed breed) gypsy airs which pass for Magyar music, in Hungary and elsewhere. He contrived to conceal himself and day after day, while the servant worked, recorded a number of songs whose primitive character, he at once recognized. With this impetus, he embarked on a tour which lasted over two years, as long as his money held out. On his journeys among the peasants he met Kodály, out on a similar mission of research. Without previous inkling of each other’s aims, they proceeded together, recording the ancient songs of the Magyars in the compilation which is famous today.”

E D

Ernest von Dohnányi (1877) a noted pianist and composer of Hungary has spent most of his life in Berlin and has toured Europe and America in piano recitals. He has written many works for orchestra, chamber music, piano and opera, all of which show more influence of Brahms than of men of his own land. He has been engaged as conductor of the State Symphony Orchestra of New York for the season 1925–26.

A twenty-eight year old pupil of Béla Bartók, Georg Kosa, shows decided gifts in his first orchestral work, Six Pieces for Orchestra.

C S

The Czech school founded by Smetana and Dvorak and Zdenko Fibich (1850–1900) and continued by Vitezslav Novak (1870), Josef Suk (1874), and Vaclar Stepan (1889), has had a rebirth in the 20th century. Leos Janacek, although over seventy, is the leading spirit; Rudolf Karel (1881), a pupil of Dvorak, Bohuslav Martinu, a follower of Stravinsky, and Ernest Krenek (1902), a pupil of Schreker, and Alois Haba (1893), pupil of Novak and Schreker are the working forces. (Janacek died in 1928.)

Alois Haba first wrote chamber music, then he tried some interesting experiments for which he is known as the “quarter-tone man.” We have heard of quarter-tones among the Hindus and Arabs (Chapter VI) and as the human ear has become more educated, the possibility of dividing the scale into quarter-tones is much discussed, and seems to be the next step in developing music along the line of overtones (see above). Did you ever realize that as with eyes that are far-sighted or near-sighted, ears may vary too, in the amount they hear? Most people think that every one hears alike, but this is not so. Stravinsky was one day sitting with a friend on the shore of a Swiss Lake near which he lived. The friend said the water was calm and still, but Stravinsky heard, a definite musical sound! Many of these musical sounds unheard by our ears he has shown us in his music. In the same way it is said that Haba has an extraordinarily keen ear and in trying to express what he hears, he has written two string quartets in the quarter-tone system. Stringed instruments are not in tempered scales and lend themselves to any division of the interval, into third-tones, as Busoni tried, and quarter-tones as Haba has written. But he has gone further and has made a piano on which quarter-tones may be played. This may prove to be the basis of music of the future, or it may be merely one of the numerous experiments without lasting value.