St. Louis Post – Dispatch
October 1, 2003
COMMENTARY: A FORUM FOR OTHER VOICES, IDEAS AND OPINIONS Mustafa Malik has worked as an editor and writer for the Washington Times, Hartford Courant and other newspapers, and is researching the evolution of Muslim cultural patterns.
POLITICS AND RELIGION
If you have fallen for the current jingoistic line that democracy won’t grow in Muslim soil, visit my native Bangladesh. You may have second thoughts.
The South Asian country is ruled by a coalition of secularist and Islamic political parties, but that has not stopped the United States from extolling its decade-old, multiparty democracy and religious moderation, buying one-third of Bangladesh’s total exports and offering it a free-trade agreement to reward its transition to democracy.
In 1971, I left what was then East Pakistan on the eve of its independence from Pakistan to become Bangladesh. East Pakistan’s Bengali Muslims, whose roots trace back to India, had grown fed up with military rule. The founding fathers of Bangladesh developed a secular, socialist constitution and built close ties to the neighboring Hindu-majority India, which had helped secure Bangladeshi independence. But many other Bangladeshis perceived India to be anti-Muslim and, so, opposed the Indian alliance.
In response, the new rulers unleashed brutal repression in the form of a one-party dictatorship. They were supplanted by a military coup, followed by a civilian dictatorship, followed by another military coup.
I was highly skeptical when U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell, on a visit to Bangladesh last June, praised the country’s success in building a democracy and its role as “an eloquent, compelling and much needed voice of moderation.” My opinion began to change, however, when I arrived there in July for a research stint.
The size of Wisconsin, Bangladesh today teems with 130 million people who make do with an average annual income of $350. Corruption and violence are part of everyday life.
Despite these problems, political parties are taking turns governing the country through regular elections. My former newspaper colleagues, once cowed by government intimidation and censorship, are having a field day lambasting and lampooning government ministers. A retired army officer told me he believed that the era of military coups in Bangladesh is over. “The people won’t put up with it anymore,” he said.
More interestingly, Islamic symbols permeate the society that was mostly secular when I left. Most of the store signs and billboards in Dhaka, the capital, used to be in the Bengali language. Today, many are Islamic words written in the Bengali alphabet. Dhaka and Sylhet, my hometown, have more mosques with bigger and younger congregations than before. Women’s head scarves are a common sight in posh shopping centers and elite gatherings, where they previously were rare.
Several journalists and intellectuals told me that Bangladeshis’ heightened Islamic fervor reflected a reaction to the cultural intrusion of Hindu India and America’s perceived anti-Muslim policies. They said Powell had been greeted with demonstrations denouncing the U.S. occupation of Iraq and support for Israel, which apparently has made Dhaka resist the highly coveted U.S. free-trade proposal. Bangladeshis identify with global Islam as never before.
Yet Islam also has become the wellspring of a national culture, fostering nationwide networks and solidarity among Bangladeshis. The Islamic political party Jamaat-i-Islami, having languished on the political fringe for decades, has joined the government after winning 17 seats at the last parliamentary elections. Secular politicians say the Muslims of Bangladesh are moderate and are doing business as usual with them.
Independence has allowed the Bengali Muslims to help build a more cohesive national culture. That, in turn, is one of the main reasons that Bangladeshis, despite their fierce political feuds, have been able to develop a working democratic system.
