Mirza Fakhrul Islam Alamgir, a top BNP leader and Minister for Local Government, Rural Development, recently stated that Jamaat should be politically ‘eliminated.’ For any politician who does not engage in covert or conspiratorial politics, it is not unusual to aim to defeat a political opponent through political or ideological means. In principle, there is nothing inherently objectionable about that.
However, a closer analysis of contemporary political discourse and strategy in Bangladesh suggests that calls for the ‘elimination’ of an opposition force go beyond ordinary political rhetoric. Such language carries deeper implications for democratic culture and norms.
This statement by Mirza Fakhrul Islam Alamgir invites renewed theoretical and practical reflection on the nature of political competition, tolerance, and the boundaries of ideological struggle.
At its core, democracy rests on pluralism and competitive politics. Political parties are expected to coexist, not deny each other’s legitimacy, and to compete on the basis of ideas and policies. Political theorist Robert Dahl, in his concept of ‘polyarchy,’ emphasised that effective democracy requires both participation and competition – where multiple actors vie for public support. Within this framework, the notion of ‘elimination’ stands in direct tension with democratic ideals, as it implies monopoly rather than competition. Similarly, Hannah Arendt famously argued that “Power and violence are opposites; where the one rules absolutely, the other is absent.” Her insight underscores that genuine political power arises from consent and participation, not coercion. Attempts to suppress or eliminate a political force often reflect a limitation of power rather than its strength.
History repeatedly demonstrates that no ideology can be permanently suppressed through force. Enduring political success depends instead on ideological superiority, policy coherence, and effective implementation. Democratic competition requires better ideas, welfare-oriented programmes, and the ability to earn public trust. Moreover, political legitimacy cannot be sustained in the long term by development statistics or infrastructure achievements alone. Amartya Sen, through his concept of ‘development as freedom,’ argued that development is meaningful only when it expands human freedoms, rights, and participation. Development and democracy are therefore interdependent; one cannot be sustained without the other.
Bangladesh’s own experience reflects this reality. Even where narratives of development are strong, a lack of accountability, transparency, and rule of law erodes public confidence. Sustainable political stability requires aligning development with democratic governance.
In this context, the long tenure of the government led by Sheikh Hasina and the Awami League has made these questions even more pressing. Alongside development initiatives, allegations of excessive control, intolerance toward dissent, and institutional weakening have contributed to a crisis of political trust. This experience illustrates that power-driven dominance may appear effective in the short term, but it ultimately undermines long-term legitimacy.
Political language itself plays a critical role in shaping democratic culture. Terms like ‘elimination’ intensify polarisation and shrink the space for tolerance. In contrast, inclusive language and dialogue-based politics strengthen democratic institutions. Ultimately, the sustainability of democracy depends not only on formal institutions but also on political culture and leadership attitudes. When political leaders view opponents not as enemies but as competitors, the political process becomes more mature and stable.
In Bangladesh’s current political landscape, the tension between ‘politics of elimination’ and ‘ideological competition’ is highly significant. Historical experience, political theory, and contemporary realities all point to the same conclusion: lasting political success cannot be achieved through force, but through democratic practice, principled leadership, and public trust.
It is therefore essential for political leaders to reassess their language and strategies. No political system can endure without democracy and good governance. Advancing toward a model grounded in accountability, participation, and democratic values remains the most viable path toward a stable and prosperous Bangladesh.
The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author
The writer is a Former journalist and a student of Political Science, University of Dhaka
