Tarique Rahman and other histories of fiction

When Tarique Rahman said that Ziaur Rahman was the first President of Bangladesh many people were understandably incredulous. He can't have said that, he didn't mean it, he loves his father too much, what is this new political conspiracy against chetona and so on! It's difficult to say why he said what he did unless it's an outpouring of emotions and absurdity. But then if this statement was the peak of such a pattern of absurdities, it's also not outside the practices of fictionalising our history. Tarique's latest one is only an extreme example of it.

* * *

What is also absurd is how Khaleda Zia supported Tarique. She is the leader of the leading opposition party and not just another person or a politician! Yet she just went ahead and supported her son. By doing so, she plunged her and her party's credibility even further. Or perhaps she knows that credibility is not that important in Bangla politics where fictionalising of history is common and the political line between facts and fiction is never clear.

* * *

What really is a mystery is why the PM Sheikh Hasina responded to this absurd political call. After all, there are many other issues that she doesn't respond to including her quite mysterious political acts such as passing the 15^th amendment, or holding a 'singing' event which has drawn near universal criticism and allegations of corruption. Yet she decided to promptly defend the fact that it was Mujib and not Zia who was the first President. Was this at all needed? By responding to this absurdity she provided credibility to it, at least somewhat. Is it because Hasina too is not outside fictionalising history and politics?

* * *

Perhaps the silliest moment in this drama came when a BNP leader tried to explain that what Tarique actually tried to say was in the period between when Zia made several announcements from Kalurghat and the Mujibnagar Government was formed, Zia was the "chief" and hence the President. This simply was not the fact so why did Zia's son say this? Zia himself never said so because he may have appeared in many guises but never as a fool. And yet the BNP leaders are now hoping to please the party leader by trying to 'explain' the son's utterances. Zia's real tragedy is that he has left a party behind which has no common sense. Lucky for the party, others of  BNP haven't marched in and tried to defend this strange statement.

* * *

The only group which has taken Tarique Rahman's statement seriously is the Awami League. Not only has the party including the PM condemned the move finding many conspiracies and political games in it but even the parliament has gone into an overdrive over it. There is not only talk of summoning Khaleda but even trying her on sedition charges. Everyone is worked up on something which is basically a fiction or a fantasy. It's this that makes the matter significant. It's not about history but politics.  Having lived in that world and borrowed from it for so long it is feeling threatened because fictions rather than factual matters rule our politics and BNP's fiction could become in their anxious minds a political threat in the future.

* * *

To end this regime of lies, make believes, assumptions and twisting of facts, we need to liberate history from politics. It can't be done by our governments and politicians who have developed a major stake in fact distortions, and both the parties practice it as well as the other. But it's not limited to politicians only. Several generations have grown up believing in what is served by politicians and partisan academics. We no longer know what the facts are; we only know the facts that are told to us. This is why we live by distortions, swear by the lies and are scared by them all.

* * *

The best way to combat this is by ensuring that an independent history uncontaminated by politics comes to exist. The reason why we don't want to face the making of an independent history is simple. We may not be able to use facts for our own needs. What Tarique Rahman is doing is following the example set by people before him. Just as the BNP leaders have tried to undermine Sheikh Mujib as the leader of the 1971 movement, the AL has tried to portray Zia as a near Razakar and Begum Zia as a willing friend of the Pakistan army during 1971. It shows the level of mentality our politicians have. Only dirty politics matters in this country.

* * *

Sheikh Mujib is the unquestionable leader of the Bengali nationalist movement of 1971 and the War of Liberation. And raising any issues by asking who declared what is irrelevant. The declaration issue is meaningless politically but as a symbol of resistance by members of the newly forming Bangladesh it had immense value. It inspired many and lent morale but at no time was it a replacement of a national declaration of independence.  Yet it's surprising how both sides have fought over it. Had dues been given to both, this would not be an issue. It's also mysterious why the AL feels so nervous about it. The lack of confidence in both parties to claim a fair share of political space is obvious and that is why absurdities surface again and again.

* * *

But misconceptions exist not just with politicians but society in general.  For example, the three million dead/killed and 300000 violated women have become a "sacred fact" contesting which tantamount to treason. Yet there is no evidence or any survey done to say this number is correct. But people are criticised even for asking how these numbers came about. Some have even gone on to say that these are "emotional" facts and can't be questioned. The point is, history doesn't deal with emotions but facts. We can't be emotional with one set of facts and be factual with another. So what Tarique Rahman did was take emotional history to the absurd extreme. But he was not doing what had not been done before in a country where facts are not sacred at all.

* * *

Liberation of Bangladesh is not enough when facts are caged and used for personal or party gain. Facts too must be free and independent. Most people have waited in our 43 years of history for the government or the party to tell them the actual history. It's time this stopped. History belongs to the people, so let them construct their own history without waiting for the authorities to endorse it. History of Bangladesh must begin by what literally seems like conducting a people's war.

———————————
Afsan Chowdhury is a journalist, activist and writer.