Pre-election political unity in Bangladesh: principled or strategic?
Zakir Ahmed Khan Kamal
In the political reality of Bangladesh, the “turn of non-electoral unity” begins with the elections in sight. The names of political parties with left, right, center, middle-left, and center-right ideologies come into the discussion anew. Be it the ruling party or the potential opposition camp, all parties call for unity in one way or another. This pre-election unity is more strategic than principled.
Principled unity refers to a commonality in ideals, values, and long-term state thinking. If there is a clear understanding between the parties on these fundamental issues—democracy, rule of law, human rights, and free and fair elections—it can be called principled unity. But the political history of our country shows that such unity is very short-lived. Immediately after the elections, ideological differences become apparent again, and the bonds of unity become loose.
In reality, most pre-election alliances in Bangladesh are strategic. Their main goal is to change the balance of power, tally votes, or put pressure on opponents. Small parties join larger alliances in the hope of surviving in the political arena, while larger parties use these parties to increase their numerical strength. In this, seat distribution, movement programs, and potential power-sharing become the key issues, not ideology.
This strategic unity is even clearer in the current context. Although there is talk of unity on these issues – the crisis of confidence surrounding the elections, questions about administrative impartiality, and the demand for participatory voting – when we look deeper, we see that the parties have different goals. Some want to retain power, some want a change in power; but a unified and clear outline for state reform or institutional strengthening of democracy rarely comes to the fore.
While strategic alliances usually bring short-term gains, they fail to ensure political stability in the long term. When alliances break down after elections, they create instability in policy-making and increase distrust in parliamentary politics. This weakens democracy rather than strengthens it.
As a result, the people of this country have to suffer the consequences.
Therefore, the question is not just whether there will be unity; but what kind of unity there will be. Pre-election unity can only be positive for the country if it is built on a principled basis, where there is a clear commitment to reform the electoral system, strengthen democratic institutions and ensure the people’s right to vote. Otherwise, even if a chapter of the election ends with just strategic unity, the people of this country will not be free from the political crisis. To maintain political stability in Bangladesh and create a strong democratic environment, political parties now need to unite in unity of principles above strategy.
Zakir Ahmed Khan Kamal
Headmaster (retd) and columnist
Mobile :-01712876434