Living through these absurd days, I am reminded of Brecht's well-known play The Good Woman of Setzuan in which the situation is somewhat analogous to that in which the President, and the Chief Adviser of the Caretaker Government now finds himself. There is a "good" woman, Shui Ta, who starts a tobacco factory with money gifted to her by the gods. She realises that it is impossible to be both "good" and "successful" in a society surrounded by greedy, rapacious and lying people. In the same way, it is becoming obvious that it is impossible to be both a partisan President and a non-partisan Chief of the interim government. Shui Ta hits upon a dramatic solution to the conundrum of her situation: the need to be good and the need to survive financially. The "good" woman, Shui Ta, disappears from the scene, and reappears in the disguise of a man, Shen Te, who runs the tobacco factory with enormous success. What solution does Professor Dr Iazuddin have? Will he give precedence to his role as President or to his role as the Chief Adviser? It is clear that the twain cannot meet.

It would be excellent if the President with his retinue of partisan subordinates could disappear and the new Chief Adviser of Caretaker Government -- the same person in reality -- could emerge magically from the wings to shoulder the responsibilities of steering the nation to an acceptable national election. But that is wishful thinking I'm afraid. There are no signs that the partisan President will disappear and a non-partisan Chief Adviser will take charge. The illusion of appearance and disappearance that is so effectively achievable upon the theatrical stage has assumed ominous dimensions in the arena of national politics, the function of the Chief Adviser being subsumed by that of the President. What we are witnessing in fact is the disappearance of the Chief Adviser, sworn to act neutrally with his council of advisers, from centre stage. Most decisions and actions seem to emanate from a shadowy area behind the Presidential curtain.

This has become evident in a number of recent actions of the government: the declaration that we in fact have a presidential form of government, later retracted when the blatant unconstitutionality of the statement became too difficult to defend; the order from Home Secretary, acting on the President's order, to deploy the army to enforce law and order, again retracted when there was a chorus of protest, not the least from Council of Advisers who knew nothing about it; the elevation of the President's Press Secretary to the rank and status of a State Minister and Adviser to the President; the President's refusal to meet a delegation of the Dhaka University Teachers' Association, a body of which he was himself the President, and to which he owes to no small extent, his current exalted and controversial status. And most importantly, the CG's failure, so far, to come up with a mechanism to remove the CEC.

The conclusion is unavoidable: that this is the most ineffectual Caretaker Government that we have had so far, and for no fault of the advisers themselves. They might have good intentions (and it is clear that some of them do), they can look self-important in their sleek, shiny black cars, speeding back and forth between this Alliance and that Jote, they can mouth well-meaning platitudes about how things are going ahead, but the common perception is that they are no more than toothless agents of an unseen machinery bigger and more powerful than their combined efficiency, experience and wisdom. Or shall they somehow rise in unison, manfully shoulder their responsibilities, and accomplish what their predecessors did?

The last three Caretaker Governments did manage to deliver to the nation, criticisms and controversies notwithstanding, three acceptable elections won first by BNP in 1991, by AL in 1996, and then the last by BNP again in 2001. They had a clear mandate and they set out successfully to fulfil that mandate. That is all we want now--a level playing field that will enable the people to elect the next government of their choice, be it Awami League, BNP, Jamaat-i-Islam or LDP or any other party. All parties, except the 4-party Jote, believe that the creation of this level-playing field is not possible under a partisan President who is not seen to be doing enough to remove an equally partisan CEC.

There was a brief moment of relief when the BNP government finally came to an end in October. Then after a day or so of protests, violence, and uncertainty, there was another moment of euphoria when Justice K M Hasan expressed his reluctance to join as the Chief of the Caretaker Government. The stage seemed to be set for three months of non-partisan rule. Finally, in a dramatic reversal of expectations, President Iazuddin shocked the nation, and stunned the Awami League into two hours of uncharacteristic silence, by stepping into the neutral role of the Chief Adviser himself. According to most experts of the Constitution (except the Dean of the Faculty of Law whose expertise is now seriously in question), the custodian of the Constitution had himself flouted the constitutional process for the nomination of the Chief Adviser. The pomp and circumstance of the swearing-in ceremony forced the people, and even the Awami League, to a numbed acquiescence.

Hindsight suggests that President Iazuddin's action of taking on the double role of a partisan President and a non-partisan Chief Adviser was part of a masterfully scripted play, brilliantly choreographed by some home-grown Machiavelli. The CEC plays no small part in this drama. As the President was being sworn in, the smiling faces of BNP and Jamaat stalwarts indicated how much they were enjoying their parting shot against the opposition. BNP's political tour de force was indeed very impressive.

However, the drama is yet to be played out in its entirety. The only thing that is certain is the uncertainty of its outcome. As I write this, the 14-party alliance has called off its 4-day siege giving the caretaker administration another four days for more talks. Much depends on whether the President/Chief Adviser can wriggle out of this straitjacket and emerge as the good man of Bangladesh, strong, non-partisan and decisive, and truly deserve the A+ that Dr Yunus had given him in advance. Much depends on whether the CEC, the redoubtable Mr Aziz, really wants to go down as one of the most hated men in Bangladesh's political history.

Shawkat Hussain is Professor of English, Dhaka University.