Monday, 29 December, 2025
Bangladesh is racing towards the 13th National Election amid rapid political realignments, but the National Citizen Party’s decision to align electorally with Jamaat-e-Islami has triggered a wave of anxiety that cuts to the moral core of the country’s emerging political order.
What might have been framed as a tactical move has instead triggered a wider debate about political ethics, credibility, and the cost of compromise.
Announced on Sunday, just a day before the nomination deadline, the alliance has gone far beyond electoral calculations. It has reopened a fundamental question that many political analysts now find unavoidable: is the NCP, a party born out of the moral fervour of the July uprising, trading its founding principles for parliamentary seats?
Late on Sunday night, NCP convenor Nahid Islam, a prominent figure of the July uprising, confirmed the pact, framing it as an “electoral understanding” designed to keep the contest competitive. Announced at the last possible moment, the move intensified both urgency and unease.
The message had already been signalled hours earlier, when Jamaat Ameer Dr Shafiqur Rahman addressed an emergency press conference at the Jatiya Press Club, revealing not only the alliance with the NCP but also the Liberal Democratic Party’s entry into the bloc.
Yet the most telling reaction came not from rivals, but from within the NCP itself. Even before the alliance was formally unveiled, thirty founding members warned of mass resignation should the party proceed with any seat-sharing arrangement involving Jamaat and the wider coalition. Two senior female leaders have already resigned.
For many within the NCP’s own ranks, the issue is not electoral mathematics but moral coherence. A party that rose on the language of principle, sacrifice, and democratic renewal now finds itself accused of adopting the very transactional politics it once condemned.
In a carefully worded but deeply critical letter to the party leadership, the dissenters pointed to Jamaat-e-Islami’s historical record—particularly its opposition to the 1971 Liberation War and its alleged role in wartime atrocities—as irreconcilable with the democratic and pro-liberation values the NCP claims to uphold.
The letter argued that an alliance with Jamaat fundamentally undermines the moral legitimacy on which the party was built.
The criticism went further. Jamaat and its student wing, Shibir, were accused of divisive political conduct since the July uprising, including infiltration of other parties, character assassination of women leaders, and contributing to what the signatories described as an emerging form of religion-based social authoritarianism.
For a party that presents itself as a champion of human rights, minority protection, gender equality, and pluralism, many political analysts warned, the alliance represents a troubling contradiction. These concerns are already translating into political consequences.
According to the dissenting leaders, news of the alliance has begun to alienate moderate supporters who were drawn to the NCP precisely because it promised a clean break from old-style power politics.
“If those expecting new politics withdraw their support, we risk losing our centrist base,” the letter of 30 NCP leaders cautioned, warning that the party’s long-term political agency could be irreparably weakened.
Signs of internal fracture within the NCP have become increasingly pronounced. Mahfuj Alam, a prominent figure of the July uprising, publicly distanced himself from the party after rejecting an offer to join the alliance.
The rupture within the NCP deepened with the resignation of Tasnim Jara, the party’s senior joint member secretary, who made it clear she would not contest under any banner linked to Jamaat. Opting to run independently in Dhaka-9, she framed her decision as a stand for political renewal beyond the transactional logic of electoral seat-sharing.
Adding weight to the dissent, Samantha Sharmeen, senior joint convener of the NCP, voiced unequivocal opposition to any electoral alliance with Jamaat-e-Islami. Speaking through a Facebook post on Sunday morning, she warned that any cooperation with Jamaat, given its political stance and ideology, would force the party to “pay a heavy price.”
The exodus continued with Tajnuva Jabeen, another senior NCP leader, resigning amid mounting speculation over a potential alliance. Announcing her departure at 12:35 pm on Sunday, Tajnuva—who had served as joint convenor—cited both moral and strategic concerns as the driving force behind her decision.
Her resignation came just a day after Tasnim Jara stepped down, signalling a widening rift within the party as it navigates a critical electoral juncture.
Meanwhile, Ahmedur Rahman Tanu, who had received the NCP nomination for the Narayanganj-5 seat, has withdrawn from the parliamentary race, citing the current political climate. He conveyed his decision to the media on Sunday.
A central committee member and joint coordinator of the party in Narayanganj, Tanu said, “I have decided to abandon my intention to contest the election under the NCP banner in light of the present political realities and personal considerations.” His withdrawal follows a series of resignations by senior NCP leaders protesting the party’s decision to form an alliance with Jamaat-e-Islami, underscoring growing unease within the party ranks and intensifying questions about its moral and strategic direction.
Nahid Islam has sought to counter these criticisms by insisting that the alliance is purely tactical. Speaking at a press briefing in Dhaka, he argued that the understanding was necessary to overcome electoral barriers, preserve unity in the reform movement, and prevent hegemonic forces from blocking post-uprising change.
There was no ideological convergence, he stressed—only agreement on “minimum points” to navigate the election.
However, many analysts remain unconvinced. They argue that the distinction between tactical cooperation and moral compromise becomes meaningless when the alliance involves a party whose ideological foundations and historical legacy stand in direct opposition to the NCP’s stated values.
The NCP emerged from the July 2024 uprising with an ambitious promise: a “Second Republic”, constitutional reform, civic nationalism, and equal citizenship irrespective of faith. Jamaat-e-Islami’s political identity, rooted in Islamist ideology and burdened by its 1971 role, sits uneasily with that vision.
For a party that presents itself as a champion of human rights, minority protection, gender equality, and pluralism, many political analysts warned, the alliance represents a troubling contradiction. These concerns are already translating into political consequences.
For many within the NCP’s own ranks, the issue is not electoral mathematics but moral coherence. A party that rose on the language of principle, sacrifice, and democratic renewal now finds itself accused of adopting the very transactional politics it once condemned.
As Bangladesh enters a volatile electoral season—marked by the banning of the Awami League and the renewed assertiveness of Jamaat—the NCP-Jamaat understanding may indeed reshape the political map.
Whether it also reshapes the NCP’s moral standing, however, is the deeper question now resonating across the political spectrum—one that may define the party’s future long after the ballots are cast.
Nahid Islam has sought to counter these criticisms by insisting that the alliance is purely tactical. Speaking at a press briefing in Dhaka, he argued that the understanding was necessary to overcome electoral barriers, preserve unity in the reform movement, and prevent hegemonic forces from blocking post-uprising change.
Comments
Bangladesh is racing towards the 13th National Election amid rapid political realignments, but the National Citizen Party’s decision to align electorally with Jamaat-e-Islami has triggered a wave of anxiety that cuts to the moral core of the country’s emerging political order.
What might have been framed as a tactical move has instead triggered a wider debate about political ethics, credibility, and the cost of compromise.
Announced on Sunday, just a day before the nomination deadline, the alliance has gone far beyond electoral calculations. It has reopened a fundamental question that many political analysts now find unavoidable: is the NCP, a party born out of the moral fervour of the July uprising, trading its founding principles for parliamentary seats?
Late on Sunday night, NCP convenor Nahid Islam, a prominent figure of the July uprising, confirmed the pact, framing it as an “electoral understanding” designed to keep the contest competitive. Announced at the last possible moment, the move intensified both urgency and unease.
The message had already been signalled hours earlier, when Jamaat Ameer Dr Shafiqur Rahman addressed an emergency press conference at the Jatiya Press Club, revealing not only the alliance with the NCP but also the Liberal Democratic Party’s entry into the bloc.
Yet the most telling reaction came not from rivals, but from within the NCP itself. Even before the alliance was formally unveiled, thirty founding members warned of mass resignation should the party proceed with any seat-sharing arrangement involving Jamaat and the wider coalition. Two senior female leaders have already resigned.
For many within the NCP’s own ranks, the issue is not electoral mathematics but moral coherence. A party that rose on the language of principle, sacrifice, and democratic renewal now finds itself accused of adopting the very transactional politics it once condemned.
In a carefully worded but deeply critical letter to the party leadership, the dissenters pointed to Jamaat-e-Islami’s historical record—particularly its opposition to the 1971 Liberation War and its alleged role in wartime atrocities—as irreconcilable with the democratic and pro-liberation values the NCP claims to uphold.
The letter argued that an alliance with Jamaat fundamentally undermines the moral legitimacy on which the party was built.
The criticism went further. Jamaat and its student wing, Shibir, were accused of divisive political conduct since the July uprising, including infiltration of other parties, character assassination of women leaders, and contributing to what the signatories described as an emerging form of religion-based social authoritarianism.
For a party that presents itself as a champion of human rights, minority protection, gender equality, and pluralism, many political analysts warned, the alliance represents a troubling contradiction. These concerns are already translating into political consequences.
According to the dissenting leaders, news of the alliance has begun to alienate moderate supporters who were drawn to the NCP precisely because it promised a clean break from old-style power politics.
“If those expecting new politics withdraw their support, we risk losing our centrist base,” the letter of 30 NCP leaders cautioned, warning that the party’s long-term political agency could be irreparably weakened.
Signs of internal fracture within the NCP have become increasingly pronounced. Mahfuj Alam, a prominent figure of the July uprising, publicly distanced himself from the party after rejecting an offer to join the alliance.
The rupture within the NCP deepened with the resignation of Tasnim Jara, the party’s senior joint member secretary, who made it clear she would not contest under any banner linked to Jamaat. Opting to run independently in Dhaka-9, she framed her decision as a stand for political renewal beyond the transactional logic of electoral seat-sharing.
Adding weight to the dissent, Samantha Sharmeen, senior joint convener of the NCP, voiced unequivocal opposition to any electoral alliance with Jamaat-e-Islami. Speaking through a Facebook post on Sunday morning, she warned that any cooperation with Jamaat, given its political stance and ideology, would force the party to “pay a heavy price.”
The exodus continued with Tajnuva Jabeen, another senior NCP leader, resigning amid mounting speculation over a potential alliance. Announcing her departure at 12:35 pm on Sunday, Tajnuva—who had served as joint convenor—cited both moral and strategic concerns as the driving force behind her decision.
Her resignation came just a day after Tasnim Jara stepped down, signalling a widening rift within the party as it navigates a critical electoral juncture.
Meanwhile, Ahmedur Rahman Tanu, who had received the NCP nomination for the Narayanganj-5 seat, has withdrawn from the parliamentary race, citing the current political climate. He conveyed his decision to the media on Sunday.
A central committee member and joint coordinator of the party in Narayanganj, Tanu said, “I have decided to abandon my intention to contest the election under the NCP banner in light of the present political realities and personal considerations.” His withdrawal follows a series of resignations by senior NCP leaders protesting the party’s decision to form an alliance with Jamaat-e-Islami, underscoring growing unease within the party ranks and intensifying questions about its moral and strategic direction.
Nahid Islam has sought to counter these criticisms by insisting that the alliance is purely tactical. Speaking at a press briefing in Dhaka, he argued that the understanding was necessary to overcome electoral barriers, preserve unity in the reform movement, and prevent hegemonic forces from blocking post-uprising change.
There was no ideological convergence, he stressed—only agreement on “minimum points” to navigate the election.
However, many analysts remain unconvinced. They argue that the distinction between tactical cooperation and moral compromise becomes meaningless when the alliance involves a party whose ideological foundations and historical legacy stand in direct opposition to the NCP’s stated values.
The NCP emerged from the July 2024 uprising with an ambitious promise: a “Second Republic”, constitutional reform, civic nationalism, and equal citizenship irrespective of faith. Jamaat-e-Islami’s political identity, rooted in Islamist ideology and burdened by its 1971 role, sits uneasily with that vision.
For a party that presents itself as a champion of human rights, minority protection, gender equality, and pluralism, many political analysts warned, the alliance represents a troubling contradiction. These concerns are already translating into political consequences.
For many within the NCP’s own ranks, the issue is not electoral mathematics but moral coherence. A party that rose on the language of principle, sacrifice, and democratic renewal now finds itself accused of adopting the very transactional politics it once condemned.
As Bangladesh enters a volatile electoral season—marked by the banning of the Awami League and the renewed assertiveness of Jamaat—the NCP-Jamaat understanding may indeed reshape the political map.
Whether it also reshapes the NCP’s moral standing, however, is the deeper question now resonating across the political spectrum—one that may define the party’s future long after the ballots are cast.
Nahid Islam has sought to counter these criticisms by insisting that the alliance is purely tactical. Speaking at a press briefing in Dhaka, he argued that the understanding was necessary to overcome electoral barriers, preserve unity in the reform movement, and prevent hegemonic forces from blocking post-uprising change.
Comments
