Title: Attack on the minorities: Victims of communalism or political intolerance?
Author: Afsan Chowdhury
Publication: The Daily Star (Bangladesh)
Date: Oct 18, 2001
URL: http://www.dailystarnews.com/200110/18/n1101802.htm#BODY3

The Hindus aren't victims of communalism; they are victims of political autocracy. Religious intolerance didn't hurt them, political intolerance did.

The attack on the minorities has been a rude wake up call to many. Some have seen it as the revival of extreme communalism. Those who equated the BNP led 4-party alliance with an anti-minority position felt it confirmed the idea. Others have seen it through the lenses of escalating violence. The BNP government's delay in taking swift action and pussyfooting on the issue didn't dilute the anxieties either. AL has also turned it into a political commodity. The issue may get fudged amidst denials and petty politicking. 

The minority or precisely the Hindu problem began before the first vote was even cast. Conventional wisdom is that the minorities always vote for the Awami League. And some anti-AL politicians are not above bullying the Hindus to stay away from the voting booths. It has happened more than once before.

It's curious that Hindus have been stereotyped as an AL vote bank, often a deciding one. Of course they have a right to vote anyone they like. But it seems that voting as per will is a lesser sin only when one is a member of the majority community. 

The minority is looked upon as a vote bank of Awami League but this party has used insecurity to win elections rather than improve the lot of this voters group. Research shows that Hindu property grabbing is common to both AL and BNP leaders. This party has done little to institute changes in the democratic structure that ultimately protects a People from social repression. By treating them as a personal property of sorts of the party, AL actually denied them any independent identity. Meanwhile the anti-AL forces did the same by equating Hindus with AL only. Clearly, the minorities had or have little space except as party adjuncts or political stereotypes in the dominant political imagination.

But the high intensity of violence, intimidation and downright marginalization, which the Hindus had to face, was a very disturbing scene in the post election scenario. It wasn't very easy to explain either why that happened. However, as some of the field reports begin to come in we can try to piece together an emerging jigsaw puzzle.

Only Hindus are Awami Leaguers? It seems that the Hindus are being attacked not as Hindu but as AL voters. These are certainly revenge attacks. Since Hindus have an unshakable AL tag they are also easy targets. Many Muslim AL activists are being attacked as well but all Hindus are thought of as AL supporters and attacked. Hindus therefore can't be voters only like most others. Simply by voting, they become activists in the semantics of political intolerance. 

It's interesting that Christians or the Indigenous people are not being targeted. Revenge attack on Hindus are possible without the problem of counter attack. Hindus don't fight back. But why did the violent elements of BNP respond so quickly and in the process risk unpopularity? 

Every report that we get from the field and our own experience shows that in the last decade, the democratic space has in fact shrunk. Autocracy and intolerance is more pervasive than ever before. Nazim Kamran Chowdhury, the political analyst who has become oft quoted for his logical approach in dissecting the 2001 election results has in a "Prothom Alo" interview doubted if AL lost votes due to their "terrorism". In fact AL has got more votes than they ever got after the 1973 elections and gained much since 1996. Fact is, intolerance has become more established in our political mind than we would care to admit. 

Can tolerance exist? The AL didn't allow the BNP or other Opposition to hold meetings or carry out normal political activities during their rule in most places where violence has been reported. That means they created only autocratic spaces and expanded it by excluding democratic ones. The only political space left to occupy is the autocratic space. Any space that is immediately occupied is therefore that of intolerance. 

As there is no democratic culture or space, the BNP simply stepped into Awami League's political shoes. It didn't wish to be democratic but wished to take control. Politics is limited to or controlled by the autocratic psyche. 

A good example is the Dhaka University where AL led Chhatra League prevented the BNP led JCD to even enter the campus. Having had their chance after elections, the JCD did exactly the same. And since there is no political culture of tolerance, the question of 'violating' democratic norms doesn't exist. In its absence, we don't know how to be democratic. The Hindus aren't victims of communalism; they are victims of political autocracy. Religious intolerance didn't hurt them, political intolerance did.

But whatever be the reason, the fall out of the attack on Hindus will be larger than expected. First, the Hindus, already feeling as outsiders will now feel expelled from the mainstream. They will feel that Hindus have to pay a price for political preferences. With the history of ethnic cleansing in 1971 when Hindus were victims of the official pogrom, the memories will be revived because the Pak army's close friend, the Jamaat-e-Islami now shares official power.

AL will naturally use this issue to make life for the BNP uncomfortable. But it will be up to the latter to decide if it will opt for democratic or autocratic spaces. Given that the parliament is also a tool for the fulfilment of the autocratic imagination, one will have to wait and see if the BNP decides to change that or not. It's too early to make a judgement but the party's culture is more or less the same as that of Awami League. 

Can the BNP handle this crisis? One mustn't speculate but before any actions take place, the space has to be created which accepts tolerance and reason. That doesn't yet exist. But one can always begin.

Afsan Chowdhury is Senior Assistant Editor of The Daily Star.