Student politics: Story of glory and degeneration

Syed Munir Khasru

For quite some time, student politics has been giving a strong negative connotation in Bangladesh. This has not always been the case and the history of students' struggle and sacrifice for the country and democracy is a golden one. From the Language Movement of 1952 to the establishment of Parliamentary Democracy in 1991, students have been the vanguards in protecting the freedom and upholding the democratic aspirations of people of Bangladesh. Unfortunately, in recent times the trend has been so negative that there have been calls from different quarters to ban student politics itself.

Youth under the age of 25 years make up more than half of the population in Bangladesh. The country is yet to tap into the potential of its youth segment with most becoming averse to student politics. A recent study reveals that more than 80% of the youth disapprove of student politics. The plight of student politics cannot be treated in isolation from the looming broader crisis of weak governance, unhealthy political culture, and poor leadership.

What is interesting is that it was the colonial British government which established modern educational institutions in our subcontinent. At that time, student organizations had a more cultural-literary bent. During the early nineteenth century, Henry Derozio's Academic Association was a literary and debating club. It was only with the infusion of nationalist politics in the late 19th century Bengal that students became politically active. It took a violent turn in the early 20th century as in the case of Dhaka-based Anushilan Samity which was an anti-British militant student organization. With the onset of Congress and Muslim League leadership in subcontinent's politics, the students of the then East Bengal actively participated in both organiztional as well as agitational politics.

While the deepening fault lines of communalism in the first half of 1940s pitted students from different communities against one another, in late '40s and over the '50s the trend was more towards affirming non-communal overarching Bengali identity against the dominance of Urdu in the Pakistan state. The glorious Language Movement in early '50s demonstrated the important role of students in politics. When Muhammad Ali Jinnah came to Dhaka to address the Bengalis, apart from his infamous declaration regarding Urdu, he also warned students against engaging in any form of politics. The students not only protested his proclamation regarding exclusion of Bangla as a national language, but also resoundingly demonstrated the positive potential of student politics in spearheading the language movement that pinnacled in 1952.

Some of the key student leaders of those time were Sheikh Mujibur Rahman (one of the principal organizers of East Pakistan Muslim Students League in 1948), Syed Nazrul Islam (President of Salimullah Muslim Hall Students Union in 1940s), Tajuddin Ahmad (one of the founders of East Bengal Chhatra League in 1948) who would subsequently lead the national liberation struggle of Bangladesh. Many of the prominent political leaders of today started their journey through active participation in politics during their campus days. Some of these leaders not only played a patriotic role during critical junctures of the nation but also were meritorious students while in the university. There was a healthy culture of positive evolution of national leaders from their student days through acts of patriotism, penchant for knowledge, pursuit of academic excellence, and healthy co-existence with their political rivals.

In the 1960s, student politics assumed an even stronger role, linked with the overall cultural revolution flourishing in the then East Pakistan. The Ayub Regime created a student organ called National Students Federation (NSF) that sought to terrorize and repress democratic aspirations of the student community. NSF did not enjoy broad support in the wider community of students. Oganizations like the Chhatra League, Students' Union, etc. were the mainstream student organizations active in that era. The 1962 movement against the Hamoodur Rahman Education Commission Report was a jumpstart of the anti-Ayub movement marking the vanguard role of students.

When vested interests sought to fan communal flames, the progressive students bravely resisted the spread of communal violence. In 1966, the six-point movement and in 1969, the popular upsurge saw students playing a very prominent role by leading the masses. Some of the student leaders of that era subsequently became leaders in the independent Bangladesh not only in politics but also in other spheres as well, e.g. Tofail Ahmed, Matia Chowdhury, Obaidul Quader, Abdul Mannan Bhuiyan (Late), Shahjahan Siraj, Matiur Rahman (editor, Prothom Alo) and there were many other prominent personalities. The student organizations had the ability to clearly articulate broad-based political programs that would reflect the general interest of the people. For example, in the 1969 mass upsurge, the student groups formulated an eleven-point demand on which they based their movement. Student leaders like Shaheed (martyred) Asad laid down their lives selflessly for the interest of the Bengali nation. Not only university students but also students from colleges (e.g. Notre Dame College) joined rallies protesting the Ayub regime. One of the first victim groups of the Operation Searchlight in March 25, 1971 were the students of Dhaka University. The students joined the liberation war in 1971 and their sacrifices, both of student leaders and ordinary students, have been outstanding.

In 1970s, high degree of idealism permeated the students community in their zeal to build the new country which included programs like supporting farmers in the famine-stricken country. The following years were marked by violent incidents and political instability on the campus as the political leadership itself faced challenging times from mid-seventies with a corrupt dictator and usurper taking power through a bloodless coup in early eighties. The immoral character and corrupt rule that were the hallmark of the Ershad regime left its trail in student politics as well. In his desperation to cling to power, Ershad tried to divide the student community by luring some of those leaders through both pay and positions. With the military-civil bureaucracy firmly under his grip and the distrust and disrespect between the two political parties, the only front that Ershad did not have in his favor was the student community that continued to be vigilant and resistant to his wicked schemes. As early as 1983, within a year of the new regime's consolidation of power, strong student protests shook the foundations of the regime.

The student leaders and activists as well as ordinary students played the lead role in the pro-democratic struggle against Ershad regime in the 1980s when our national leaders failed to find a common ground to unite. Had not the student fronts of both Awami League and BNP defied their national leaders and joined hands in overthrowing the dictatorial regime, God knows how long the corrupt dictator would have prevailed much to the agony of the nation. This was the finest moment of student politics in Bangladesh after the country became independent when political ideology took over political loyalty for the student leaders. Despite the violent student reprisals by the regime, protests went on unabated throughout the decade against the series of sham elections that the regime arranged to legitimize its rule. The student movements blended with the wider mass movement and ultimately led to toppling the regime in 1991. Also during the floods in 1988 and cyclone in 1991, student organizations played a praiseworthy role in the aid of suffering communities.

Since the return to democracy in the early nineties, there has been a gradual decline in both the substance and quality of student leadership. In absence of any burning national issue, the student leaders have gone through a period of identity crisis as well as lack of vision as to what should be their role in the broader context of national politics and democracy. The political parties have not made conscious effort to either reenergize their student fronts or to reformulate their roles under the changed scenario. This, compounded with poor quality of leadership in many instances, has led to clashes both within and among the student fronts of the major political parties. To make things worse, over the years there has been a rise of unhealthy culture of toll collection, vandalism, patronage of armed cadres, and hooliganism. The existing lack of tolerance among the political parties have trickled down to the lower tiers and made the rivalry among their student fronts equally aggressive, confrontational, and corrosive. One can draw a few comparisons to see the key factors that are responsible for the decline in the quality of student politics:

The Changed Context: There has been a broader crisis of leadership and governance in Bangladesh which has led to the disorientation of the student politics as well. Lack of vision, intolerance, violence, rent-seeking, impunity for crime and corruption now prevail in national politics which have its reflection in the sphere of student politics. The political parties mostly use students as instruments in street politics, including confrontation with other parties. Students are treated as expendable foot-soldiers. Besides, narrow politicization of university administration has prevented the academic authorities from playing their due role in ensuring a healthy campus environment.

Decline in Content of Politics: In '60s and '80s, the agenda of student politics were twofold: academic agenda and national political agenda. In the last two decades, the main student organizations of both ruling and main opposition party have shown little appetite for academic issues, while national political issues have been overwhelmed by narrowly defined partisan interests. In Dhaka University, DUCSU elections have not been held for two decades and the student organizations have no incentives to seek legitimacy and popularity among the general students.

Economic Interests: Student political organizations have become networks of distributing patronage and rent. Especially the student wing of ruling party often gets widely involved in tender bidding. Extortion, toll collection, partisan recruitment in government and non-government organizations, admission trade, control of dormitory seats, etc. are some of the other motivating factors for which a significant portion joins student politics. The evil nexus between privileged access to admission, seats, or jobs binds the beneficiaries into an obligation to commit whatever might be asked of them in the name of student politics.

Modalities of Doing Politics: Politics in the anti-colonial, national liberation, and pro-democratic movements often followed agitational, even violent means. However, the agitations were focused on national interest instead of narrow self-interest. It was in 1960s that arms first entered the campus, but it is only in the last two decades that student politics has been speaking the language of arms alone. The factional clashes over tender or rent, the violence over control of dormitories, etc. are mindless and undermine the student political organizations themselves.

Against such a background, there is an urgent need to bring in positive qualitative changes in the student leaders of the political parties. A significant portion of these budding leaders is expected to assume important positions of national significance in the future. From being Ministers and MPS to Upazila Chairman and Ward Commissioners they are aspirants for positions available under the existing political structure of the country. Unless there is a qualitative change in the leaders of tomorrow, the country would continue to suffer from poor leadership in the peoples' representatives at different levels of governance that has deprived Bangladesh from fully exploiting its development potentials and democratic credentials. This is vital in the country's journey to become a moderate democratic Muslim state among the middle income countries of Asia.

The author is a Professor at the Institute of Business Administration (IBA), University of Dhaka.