Rift between NCP - Jamaat widening
Staff Correspondent
The distance between the newly formed National Citizen Party (NCP) and Jamaat-e-Islami is widening, weeks after the two parties stood on the same platform demanding a ban on the Awami League.
What began as a tactical alliance during the July uprising and its aftermath has now turned into an open war of words on Facebook and in party statements, with student adviser Mahfuz Alam's remarks on Jamaat-Shibir triggering a sharp backlash.
After the July uprising, NCP emerged as the political vehicle of the student leaders. Though it had no written alliance with Jamaat, the two maintained a friendly relationship. Jamaat provided the largest organisational support to the NCP-led movement demanding a ban on the Awami League for its role in the July killings.
The movement, under the banner of 'Anti-Fascist National Unity', was called by NCP's southern region chief organiser Hasnat Abdullah. Jamaat, Islami Chhatra Shibir, AB Party, Hefazat-e-Islam, Khelafat Majlish and others joined. BNP stayed largely silent.
After three days of protests, the interim government on May 10 night decided to suspend the activities of the Awami League but the celebration was soon overshadowed by controversy.
During the protests, Shibir activists chanted "In Golam Azam's Bengal, there is no place for Awami League" and a video of some Islamist activists obstructing the national anthem went viral.
As the leaders of the movement, NCP leaders faced criticism on social media. The party, which wants to project itself as centrist, suddenly found itself being branded as right-wing.
On the night of May 10, Information and Broadcasting Adviser Mahfuz Alam, known as a mastermind of the July uprising, wrote a Facebook post titled "Two words".
In it, he asked collaborators of war criminals in 1971 to apologise, and said: "To do politics in Bangladesh, you must abandon Pakistan-leaning politics. Pakistan carried out genocide in this country... Stop producing narratives in favour of genocide. Stop sabotaging from within the July forces. Come with a clean heart."
The next day, he posted another status warning that Pakistan-leaning elements would be hit wherever they are found. He deleted it within three minutes, but screenshots had already spread.
Jamaat and Shibir leaders reacted strongly, accusing an adviser holding a responsible government post of taking a partisan position and violating his oath. Shahbagh Thana Jamaat Amir Shah Mahfuzul Haque even questioned on a TV programme whether Mahfuz Alam was working for India's RAW.
Jamaat held an emergency meeting of its top leaders on Monday at its central office, followed by a central executive council meeting on Tuesday. A senior Jamaat leader told Bangladesh Pratidin that such divisive talk goes against the hopes of the July martyrs.
"We are neither Pakistan-leaning nor India-leaning. We did not agitate to become leaning towards these countries. We were on the streets for the welfare of the people," he said.
NCP Senior Joint Convener Ariful Islam Adib told a Bengali daily that Mahfuz Alam's remarks have no relation to the party.
"That is entirely his personal matter. We have clarified our position in a party statement. There is no question of pitting 1971 against 2024 here," he said.
"In politics, there is no permanent friend or permanent enemy. We want to maintain coexistence with all democratic forces on any democratic and human rights issue in the interest of the people."
Party sources say the real reason for the distance is strategic. NCP has to compete with both BNP and Jamaat. It has already locked horns with BNP. If it remains under Jamaat's shadow, it risks being permanently labelled a right-wing party.
By distancing itself from Jamaat, NCP is trying to build a narrative of a centrist, ideological party — free from the shadow of Jamaat's right-wing politics and its controversial history.
Political observers say the rift exposes a deeper tension within the post-July political settlement: the unity that brought down the Awami League was built on opposition to fascism, not on a shared vision for the future.
With elections approaching, that unity is now fracturing along old fault lines — 1971, Pakistan, India, and the question of who owns the July uprising.
For now, both sides say they want to work together for the country. But the Facebook war, the emergency meetings, and the public accusations suggest the honeymoon between the revolutionaries and the Islamists is over.
