The political landscape in Bangladesh is witnessing a sharp and escalating public feud between the newly formed, student-led National Citizen Party (NCP) and the veteran Islamist party, Bangladesh Jamaat-e-Islami (JI), marking a definitive breakdown in unity among the former opposition forces. The bitter exchange, which has unfolded over the past three days, centers on fundamental questions of national identity, political maturity, and the legitimacy of the ongoing reform process.
The feud began on October 19 when Nahid Islam, Convener of the NCP, publicly accused Jamaat of political sabotage regarding their demand for a Proportional Representation (PR) system.
The Catalyst: Accusations of Deception
In his initial statement, Nahid Islam framed Jamaat’s PR movement as a “calculated political deception” deliberately designed to derail the broader constitutional reform agenda being discussed by the Consensus Commission.
“Their motive was never reform; it was manipulation,” Islam wrote. He claimed that Jamaat had “hijacked” the original idea of a constitutional safeguard and reduced it to a narrow partisan tool, characterizing their sudden endorsement of reform as a “tactical infiltration, a political sabotage disguised as reformism.” This accusation of opportunism set the stage for the dramatic escalation that followed.
Jamaat’s Condescending Retort
Jamaat-e-Islami was quick to respond, issuing a strongly worded, yet dismissive, counter-statement on Monday, October 20. Speaking at a student-youth rally in Tala, Satkhira, JI Secretary General Professor Golam Parwar addressed the NCP directly with a paternalistic and condescending tone.
Professor Parwar stated, “You are a new party of students. If you want to compete with Jamaat-e-Islami, you have a long way to go. Don’t compete with your father right after you’re born.”
While acknowledging the NCP’s role and sacrifice as “July Warriors” during the 2024 mass uprising, Parwar strongly criticized the tone of the NCP leadership, urging them to use the language of senior political leaders rather than “indecent, uncouth, and unpolitical language.” He defended Jamaat, asserting that they were the first party to submit a complete, six-point reform proposal to the Consensus Commission in writing, contradicting the NCP’s claims that Jamaat had not contributed to the dialogue.
NCP Escalates: A Fight for National Spirit
The NCP leadership did not back down. On Tuesday, October 21, Nasiruddin Patwary, the Chief Coordinator of the NCP, posted a fierce rebuttal on social media, escalating the dispute from a squabble over political decorum to a fight over the nation’s core ideology.
Patwary unequivocally declared, “The question of Jamaat going to state power does not arise.” He asserted that Jamaat’s political philosophy and past behavior are “contrary to Bangladesh’s independence, map, and national spirit.”
The statement directly accused JI of engaging in covert political maneuvers, warning that “infiltration into the administration in disguise, politics of division, or the attempt to capture the state in the name of religion will never succeed on this soil again.” Patwary concluded by emphasizing the unity of all progressive forces, including people from Kawkmi, Sunni, and Hindu communities, united to keep the nation on a path of peace and humanity.
The Mass Uprising as the ‘Father’
The NCP’s secondary leadership also weighed in, challenging Parwar’s authority and patronizing attitude.
In comments to BBC Bangla, NCP Joint Convener Samanta Sharmin deemed Professor Parwar’s remarks not just discourteous but “politically arrogant,” noting that such language is unbecoming of senior politicians.
Senior Joint Convener Ariful Islam Adib offered the most potent counter-narrative, refuting the “father” analogy:
“The person who made the statement has taken political courtesy one step backward. To want to be someone’s father in politics is a kind of ideological problem. The Mass Uprising is the father of everyone. The NCP was born out of the context of the uprising. All political parties now have the mass uprising as their father.”
Adib dismissed Parwar’s comments as “political childishness or misconduct,” arguing that it is inappropriate for a party that acted under the command of the anti-discrimination movement during the crisis to now claim seniority over the very commanders they followed.
Implications of the Feud
The public war of words between Jamaat and the NCP solidifies the deep, ideologically charged chasm within the post-uprising political arena.
The conflict indicates that the youth-led political establishment is unwilling to offer legitimacy to Jamaat-e-Islami, specifically targeting their right to leadership and their historical opposition to secular, progressive national values. This signals that the NCP will not align with the established Islamist right wing in the run-up to the 2026 general election, forcing political groupings to reconsider their alliances as the country seeks to define its “Second Republic.”
