Friday’s mayhem and religion vs. nationalism

On the afternoon of 22nd February 2012, the streets of Dhaka turned into a sight we have seen many times on television, but probably never imagined would happen in our own neighbourhood. Instead of the typical lazy Friday afternoon, we witnessed thousands of people come out on the streets mere minutes after the Jummah prayer, forming huge processions to seemingly protest the allegedly anti-Islamic elements in the Shahbagh Movement that has been going on since 5th February 2013. Needless to say, such claims do not hold much water to anyone who has been in the vicinity of Shahbagh.

As the whole world has had to eventually acknowledge, the core demand of everyone who has expressed support for the movement is the trial of war criminals. Generations of Bangladeshis are now aware of the heinous crimes committed by some of the top leaders of what is now the Jamaat-e-Islami Bangladesh, and are adamant in their demand for capital punishment. Anything less than that is not only inconsistent with the extent of their crimes, but also highly likely to not even be implemented properly thanks to our political culture of every regime nullifying the actions and decisions of the previous one. There might be a few people in Shahbagh who do not adhere to any religion in their personal lives, and have been vocal about their views in the past. What should be obvious though is that this does not make the movement itself anti-religion, anymore than having a substantial number of Dhaka University students present there makes this a movement led by or serving the interests of Dhaka University in some manner. Further, not one of these individuals has ever made a comment about religion or belief systems in Shahbagh. In the past 20 days, it has become very clear that the Shahbagh Movement has become the common denominator of the entire nation, and we are no longer willing to draw any lines between ourselves until this one central agenda has been met.

Nevertheless, even taking the claims of these protesters at face value and accepting that they only demand justice for people defaming Islam, some questions still remain to be answered. Firstly, should the response to something as peaceful and non-confrontational as the Shahbagh Movement be engaging cops in what was basically a street fight? Within minutes of the prayers ending, people barged out of mosques all over the city, challenging the cops into retaliation, hurling stones at them, in some locations even throwing explosives at police vehicles. Everyone has the right to voice their grievances, but doing so in a fashion that jeopardizes ordinary citizens who were just trying to get home after Jummah will always seem questionable to me. Hurling objects at cops and then running back inside mosques to take shelter seems even more questionable, because to me that act seems like a major breach of the sanctity of a mosque, the centre of worship in the very religion they are claiming to uphold. The way these people went about their protests has put them at the diametrical opposite of the Shahbagh Movement. Instead of the peaceful, spontaneous congregation of citizens, the Friday protests inconvenienced and even terrified people stuck in mosques and homes, afraid to go out lest they become the proverbial "injured bystander". Instead of stating their demands in clear words, these people spread terror on the streets and gravely injured many members of the police. If they are confident that their demands are just, if they are convinced that they have popular support, why did they need explosives? Why did they need to set fire inside the Baitul Mukarram premises? How does desecrating a mosque even seem like an option to people who are concerned about the lack of respect for Islam they seem to see everywhere around themselves?

Yet, believe it or not, there are even bigger issues to discuss. Ever since people first started talking about justice for war crimes, there has always been this subtext that places anyone making these demands at odds with Islam. At a very broad scale, we could probably refer to this as a religion versus nationalism debate. Needless to say this is a false dichotomy. There is nothing at odds with being religious in one's day-to-day conduct and still want justice for the crimes committed against our nation. In fact, many would say, with appropriate arguments, that Islam itself would enforce the highest degree of punishment for war crimes and genocide. Of course, there are all sorts of different people with different opinions gathering together at Shahbagh, regardless of their opinions about religion or politics in general. If anything, such a diverse crowd should actually be testament to the fact the whole nation is willing to set aside all temporary differences if that means they can finally expect justice to be served.

However, on Friday we saw this false partition being enforced even further. I will never understand, and I am sure I am not alone in this, how protests demanding respect for Islam and the prophet eventually led to Shaheed Minars all around the country being vandalized. I am willing, albeit very reluctantly, to concede that the attacks on the Ganajagaran assemblies in several cities were motivated by the fact that these people, however wrongly, believed that these gatherings were spreading hate about Islam. But through no stretch of imagination can I find a plausible reason for vandalizing a structure which is understood by people all over Bangladesh as a symbol of taking a stand against oppression. If the point of a protest is to demand that other people respect entities that are significant to you, a good heuristic would be to not disrespect things that are significant to those people. The response to a mere handful of people possibly making some wrong gestures in the distant past about religion in general or Islam in particular should not have been an all-out attack at the Shaheed Minar. History shows us what kind of people and groups have attacked Shaheed Minars in the past, and none of them even believed in the right of Bangladesh to exist as a sovereign state.

This brings us to the last and yet probably the worst horror of the Friday protests. In Chandpur, during their demonstrations, picketers decided for whatever twisted reason to rip apart the Bangladesh flag. They then proceeded to throw it down on the ground and set it on fire. If this is not treason, then I do not know what is. The national flag is the greatest symbol of sovereignty a land can have. Yet this Friday, some people decided to dishonour it. The irony being that the point of this show of disrespect was to demand more respect for things that they themselves revere. Things that all of us revere, and yet would never even dream of choosing one over the other. None of us would ever even entertain the idea of burning our flag to avenge insults to our prophet, or vice versa. I hope these people realise, sooner or later, that they have made a very tangible gesture of contempt to the nation in response to a highly alleged act of contempt at their religion. But it might be too late for them.

More importantly, I hope that the ordinary citizens of this country see the real story here. I hope they realise that there is no conflict between Islam and asking for justice. Islam requires that you ask for justice. I hope they realise that lobbing explosives from inside a mosque does nothing to honour Islam, and only jeopardizes innocent lives. I hope they realise that no matter how terrible your grievances, if you wish to be considered citizens of this land, you cannot ever disrespect the very flag of this land. The way I see it with my limited aptitude, any individual or group who does that is openly declaring that they do not even respect the freedom of this country. I hope all of us can see it, because that is the bigger picture here. This has gone beyond politics and diplomacy.

After Friday, it has become an affront to anyone who dreams of a free, secular Bangladesh.

————————-

Hammad Ali is a teacher of Computer Science and Engineering at BRAC University.