Liberation War never fades, why doesn’t Jamaat understand that?

It has not even been four months since the BNP government, led by Tarique Rahman, assumed power following the 13th National Parliamentary Election. Yet, a sense of restlessness is already visible within Jamaat-e-Islami. In an attempt to destabilise the country and seize power, Jamaat—the defeated force of ’71—is announcing one political programme after another. At a time when the country is facing various crises and a new government is, quite literally, standing on ruins trying to rebuild the nation, Jamaat is attempting to create a political crisis by making statements such as  “the government cannot be given any more time” or “we must prepare for another July Revolution.”
In the last four months since the parliamentary election, the Jamaat-led 11-party alliance has held protest marches, rallies and leaflet distribution campaigns for at least 10 days in the capital. Programmes have also been held at metropolitan and district levels outside Dhaka. On 16 May, the 11-party alliance kicked off its divisional rallies from Rajshahi, which are scheduled to conclude on 25 July. Following this, they plan to hold a mass rally in Dhaka in October. This is unprecedented in any democracy across the world. Especially given the context in which this election was held, it was the responsibility of Jamaat and the NCP to strengthen parliament and democracy through parliament-centric politics. However, Jamaat is not only obstructing parliament from functioning effectively but is also pushing the country towards division once again. Up to the second session of parliament, Jamaat has criticised various government decisions, raised objections on multiple issues, and staged walkouts on four occasions.
Jamaat appears more focused on its political and personal interests than on public issues or national concerns. While Jamaat MPs demand the implementation of the July National Charter and the referendum verdict in parliament, they have refused to join the committee formed to implement the July Charter. This raises the question: how will the July Charter be implemented if they do not participate in the constitutional reform committee?
Political analysts believe Jamaat is deliberately obstructing the implementation of the July Charter in order to trigger a constitutional crisis in the country. Shedding crocodile tears for the July Charter on the surface while non-cooperating with its implementation from within—this, they argue, is the core of Jamaat’s politics.While the party, whose role in 1971 remains highly questioned, fails to speak up strongly for the people, it has ensured demands for washing machines, microwave ovens, and curtains for the flats allocated to its members.
Since its inception, the party has practised a politics of duplicity. It opposed the 1947 partition of the subcontinent. Under the guise of preaching Maududism, it attempted to create communal divisions in the country. By opposing the glorious Liberation War of 1971, it became an accomplice to the Pakistani genocide and brutal atrocities. In 1971, when brave Bengalis were shedding blood for independence, Jamaat joined the military junta’s cabinet. The party’s leader, Abbas Ali Khan, served as education minister, while AKM Yunus served as revenue minister. Jamaat was directly involved in the 1971 genocide and crimes against humanity by forming the Razakar, Al-Badr, Al-Shams and Peace Committees.
The International Crimes Tribunal (which is still functional) identified Jamaat as a criminal organisation. Exactly thirteen years ago, on Monday, 15 July 2013, Tribunal-1 made this observation during the verdict on Ghulam Azam. The tribunal observed that, considering documentary evidence and surrounding circumstances, it could be said that Jamaat-e-Islami, under the leadership of Professor Ghulam Azam, deliberately acted as a criminal organisation during the 1971 Liberation War.
Several verdicts delivered by the International Crimes Tribunal have referred to Jamaat-e-Islami, the party that opposed the Liberation War, as an “auxiliary force” of the Pakistani military. In these observations, the tribunal held Jamaat responsible, alongside the Pakistani military, for wartime atrocities. Yet Jamaat has never apologised for its role in 1971. According to political analysts, Jamaat can never win the trust and confidence of the people of Bangladesh without clarifying its position on its role in 1971.
Jamaat remains associated, in public perception, with anti-Bangladesh sentiment regarding 1971 and a politics of duplicity. Consequently, belittling the glorious Liberation War and spreading misinformation about 1971 whenever the opportunity arises has become a recurring feature of its politics. After the victory of the ’24 mass movement, Jamaat even went so far as to compare a mass uprising with the Liberation War. At the time, its propaganda failed due to the firm stance of the BNP. However, multiple field investigations have revealed that Jamaat was directly involved in the nationwide vandalism of Liberation War monuments and sculptures.
Over the past two years, one thing has become clear: Jamaat does not embody the spirit of the glorious Liberation War. The very foundation of its political ideology is seen by critics as a denial of ’71. Jamaat seeks to establish this political narrative whenever it gets the chance. The ordinary people of this country will never accept it. Jamaat has always stood against the spirit of the Liberation War. For this reason, it seeks to come to power through alternative tactics rather than a public mandate. Its political strategy is structured around that objective.
The actions attributed to Jamaat in 1971 are considered by critics to be part of its ideological practice. Whenever the party gets an opportunity, it has been accused of suppressing dissent. The culture of underground enforcement wings and the brutal treatment of dissenting voices in Bangladesh’s politics are, in this narrative, closely linked with Jamaat’s politics.
The martyred President Ziaur Rahman believed in open democracy. That is why he gave opportunities to all political parties. Taking advantage of this, Jamaat found space to rehabilitate itself in politics. However, research shows that since 1971, Jamaat and Shibir introduced underground politics in Bangladesh. Today, several Jamaat leaders, including its Ameer, were once associated with Jasad and radical left-wing groups.
Despite returning to politics through the support of the BNP, Jamaat has broken trust whenever the opportunity arose. In 1986, although the BNP called for a boycott of the election under Ershad, Jamaat, attracted by the spoils of power, participated in the election alongside the Awami League. When the BNP formed the government in 1991, Jamaat allied with the Awami League to launch a movement to topple it. This dual behaviour is often cited as a defining characteristic of Jamaat’s politics.
When the Awami League initiated trials of war criminals, Jamaat-Shibir was accused of infiltrating the Awami League and Chhatra League as an underground force. The so-called “Helmet Force” of Chhatra League has been described by critics as being linked to Chhatra Shibir.
After resuming politics post-1975, Jamaat allegedly introduced a politics of violence and intimidation in various universities to establish its dominance. Now, its violent nature is said to be resurfacing once again. After July ’24, Jamaat’s underground operatives allegedly came out in the open across the country and resorted to violence to assert dominance. The latest example cited is the attack on a journalist in Dhanmondi on 23 June.
Following the ascension of the Yunus government, Jamaat’s underground operatives are alleged to have infiltrated all tiers of the state, including the administration, police, educational institutions and the judiciary. It is further alleged that, with backing from the interim government, Jamaat formed a parallel power structure. These elements are still said to be present in several areas and remain active to create pressure on the elected government whenever possible. The recent simultaneous resignation of 17 law officers at the Attorney General’s Office in the Supreme Court is cited as one such example. Under the patronage of the Yunus government, Jamaat’s student wing is also accused of gaining influence in public universities. Various financial institutions are similarly said to be under its influence. Since August ’24, several media outlets are alleged to have come under its control.
Jamaat is said to have underground influence within the administration, police and judiciary. This, critics argue, explains why its leaders are once again dreaming of coming to power. Jamaat, they say, does not rely on public opinion but instead seeks to capture power according to its own blueprint. It believes the mass uprising of ’24 has brought it closer to power, and many of its leaders are now experiencing a sense of confidence and political momentum. However, critics argue that Jamaat still lacks broad public acceptability. Jamaat and the Liberation War remain political adversaries. For this reason, they argue, it is impossible for Jamaat to come to power through a public mandate. Instead, it is accused of seeking alternative routes to power, which explains its perceived intolerance towards the current elected government.
Jamaat, they conclude, continues to downplay ’71 and has still not accepted the Liberation War. This, they argue, is its fundamental mistake. As long as Bangladesh exists, ’71 will remain. The Liberation War does not fade away. Why doesn’t Jamaat understand that?