Suchergebnisse

Myanmar, earlier known as Burma, is on the cusp of a transition—a process that has to pass through formidable challenges and whose outcome is still quite uncertain. Five decades of military misrule have turned Myanmar that at one time used to be the richest into the poorest in South-east Asia and in a state of decline with an abysmal record in political, economic and social spheres. To recover from that decline, the country will need good governance, political reconciliation between the government and the opposition, between various ethnic groups and the government and the removal of long years of neglect of their aspirations and empowerment, between those opposition groups that remained within the country and the exiled groups, and finally, the goodwill and support of the international community. Aung San Suu Kyi, Myanmar's democratic leader, has joined the political process and has become the leader of the opposition in the army-dominated parliament. She also faces formidable challenges, as she has to reconcile the wide expectations of people who still consider her as a political activist fighting for the cause and the imperatives of being a constructive politician who has no other option other than pragmatic reconciliation. Relations with China are one issue that will also impinge on future of democracy in the country.

For centuries Islam in Asia was renowned for its adaptability to local practices and tolerance of other religions. Over the past three decades, however, fundamentalists have tried to homogenize Islam, introducing new tensions. More than any other factor, what has fuelled conflicts and divided Muslims and others in otherwise tolerant and harmonious plural societies of Asia, is the slow but steady process of the transformation of Islam in the region, from a syncretic and inclusive Islam to a puritanical and exclusivist one under the influence of ideas, norms, practices, and finances flowing from the Arab world. The 'Islam of the desert' has made inroads across the Indian Ocean. This process of homogenization and regimentation—a process I would like to call the 'Arabization' of Islam—puts greater emphasis on rituals and codes of conduct than on substance, through the Wahhabi and Salafi creeds, a rigidly puritanical branch of Islam exported from, and subsidized by, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The internationalization of Islam drew Asian Muslims to the desert and brought the desert to them. Such 'globalization of political Islam' could threaten stability throughout Asia and the world. Unfortunately, too many proponents of any form of fundamentalism rely on it as a tool, not for inspiring spirituality, but for acquiring economic or political power.

This article looks at the recent military intervention in the politics of Bangladesh—within the broader framework of the military's role in the politics of Asian countries, as it evolved in different stages and patterns over the years—identifies its main characteristics and prognosticates their implications on the future political developments in the country. The main hypothesis is that a new pattern of military involvement in politics is emerging in countries such as Pakistan and Bangladesh, which we will call 'power without responsibility', a trend that bodes ill for democratic developments in both the countries. In the current situation in Bangladesh, the military intervened, no doubt, to correct the mess, to use army language, not directly but indirectly by propping up their cohorts in the form of a caretaker government, where the policy directions and actions of the new government were determined essentially by the armed forces. Bangladesh military is fast imitating the Pakistani model, albeit in a different form, to place itself as an arbiter in each and every aspect of social, political and economic life of the country. Like in Pakistan, the Bangladesh army does not necessarily have to come directly into power. It can wield effective power and influence even while remaining in the background and, yet, constantly destabilize politics and deprive the democratic forces the necessary political space. The caretaker government remained in power by courtesy of the military and ruled at its bidding. If at all the current experiment of social and political engineering by the Bangladesh military succeeds, though doubtful, it can always take the credit for cleaning up the mess in the politics of the country and filling in the democracy deficit that the country is facing today. The responsibility for the failure can always be passed on to the caretaker government whose civilian façade has been kept deliberately to confuse and hoodwink the domestic constituency and the international community. So, a new model of military intervention in politics—rule without responsibility and accountability—has emerged in Pakistan and Bangladesh, which obviously has both long- and short-term implications for political developments in Third World countries and, thus, requires closer scrutiny and analysis.