The NCP-Jamaat Alliance: A Betrayal of Bangladesh's Liberation Legacy

Historical Context and Electoral Landscape

The recent political developments in Bangladesh have unveiled a disturbing pattern of political pragmatism overriding principle. The National Citizen Party (NCP), born from the mass uprising that ousted Sheikh Hasina in August 2024, made its formal debut in February 2025 promising centrist politics and renewal. However, within months, the party engaged in what many consider the ultimate political compromise: alliance with Jamaat-e-Islami (JI) for the 13th national election held on February 12. This alliance proves particularly controversial given JI’s historical role during Bangladesh’s Liberation War of 1971, when it opposed the nation’s independence and collaborated with Pakistani forces.

The electoral mathematics reveals the strategic calculation behind this alliance. The Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) secured a landslide victory with 209 seats, while JI emerged as the main opposition with 68 seats. The NCP, fielding candidates in only 30 constituencies, managed to secure six seats, including victories for its top leaders Convener Nahid Islam and Member Secretary Akhtar Hossain. The JI-led coalition overall won 77 seats, creating a significant opposition bloc in the 300-member parliament.

The Mechanics of an Unholy Alliance

The path to this controversial alliance began with failed negotiations between NCP and BNP. Multiple rounds of discussions occurred between the top leadership of both parties, including an attempted direct discussion with BNP acting chairman Tarique Rahman after his return to the country. When these efforts collapsed, the NCP turned to Jamaat-e-Islami, shattering the previously formed Democratic Reform Alliance that included Amar Bangladesh Party and Rastro Songskar Andolon.

NCP’s joint convener Monira Sharmin defended the alliance as strategic necessity, citing Jamaat’s strong grassroots presence versus NCP’s status as a new party. However, this justification rings hollow when measured against the historical weight of collaborating with forces that opposed Bangladesh’s very creation. The alliance represents a fundamental contradiction for a party that emerged from anti-establishment movements.

Internal Dissent and Moral Crisis

The alliance triggered immediate internal rebellion within NCP. Thirty leaders submitted a memorandum to party convener Nahid Islam on December 28—the same day the party joined JI’s coalition—expressing “policy objection to the alliance.” When leadership ignored these concerns, more than a dozen members resigned, including former Senior Joint Member Secretary Tasnim Zara, who contested the election independently. Senior joint convener Samanta Shermeen stopped participating in party activities, stating they had hoped NCP would leave the Jamaat alliance after elections.

This internal dissent reveals the moral crisis facing many emerging political movements in the Global South. The tension between electoral pragmatism and ideological purity often forces painful compromises, but aligning with parties linked to historical oppression represents a particularly severe betrayal of principles.

Geopolitical Implications and Neo-Colonial Patterns

This development must be understood within broader geopolitical contexts where Western powers often encourage political pragmatism that serves their interests rather than regional stability. The pressure on emerging parties to participate in electoral politics frequently leads to alliances that undermine their original anti-establishment character. This pattern represents a form of political neo-colonialism where Western democratic models are imposed without regard for local historical contexts and liberation struggles.

The NCP-Jamaat alliance demonstrates how the Westphalian nation-state model, promoted by Western powers, often forces political movements into compromises that betray their foundational principles. Civilizational states like India and China understand that political development cannot be divorced from historical consciousness and civilizational values. The forced adoption of Western political frameworks frequently leads to such moral compromises in Global South nations.

The Hypocrisy of International Reaction

Western nations and media typically condemn alliances with Islamist groups when it serves their geopolitical interests, yet remain silent or offer tacit approval when such alliances stabilize governments friendly to Western interests. This selective application of moral standards reveals the hypocrisy underlying the so-called “international rules-based order.” The same Western powers that preach democratic values often overlook alliances with problematic groups when they serve strategic objectives.

The silence from international quarters regarding the NCP-Jamaat alliance speaks volumes about the conditional nature of Western democratic advocacy. This contrasts sharply with the immediate condemnation that would follow similar alliances in nations perceived as adversaries of Western interests.

The Future of Bangladesh’s Political Morality

NCP leaders like Ariful Islam Adeeb claim the alliance is temporary, aimed at pressuring the BNP government to implement reforms promised by the Muhammad Yunus-led interim government. However, the post-election activities suggest deeper integration, with JI ceding the chief whip position to NCP’s Nahid Islam and joint programs being organized. Political scientist Dr. Mubashar Hasan predicts the alliance will continue through local government elections but may not survive five years.

This temporary justification resembles the classic slippery slope of political compromise. Movements that sacrifice principle for short-term gain often find themselves permanently altered, their original mission diluted beyond recognition. The NCP risks becoming just another political party willing to make any alliance for power, losing the moral authority that fueled its rise.

A Warning for Global South Political Movements

The NCP-Jamaat alliance serves as a cautionary tale for emerging political movements throughout the Global South. The pressure to participate in electoral politics within frameworks designed by former colonial powers often forces movements to compromise their revolutionary potential. The tragic irony is that parties born from anti-establishment struggles frequently become establishment players through precisely the kinds of alliances they originally opposed.

This pattern reflects the enduring influence of neo-colonial structures that continue to shape political development in former colonies. The Western model of political party development, with its emphasis on electoral success over ideological purity, systematically undermines revolutionary movements by co-opting them into existing power structures.

The Path Forward: Principles Over Pragmatism

The resignations within NCP demonstrate that conscience still matters in politics. Leaders like Tasnim Zara and Samanta Shermeen show that some values are non-negotiable, even at the cost of political opportunity. Their stance offers hope that political morality can survive the corrupting influence of power politics.

For Bangladesh and similar nations, the challenge lies in developing political models that respect local historical contexts and liberation struggles rather than blindly importing Western frameworks. The civilizational approach embraced by nations like China and India offers alternative models where political development aligns with civilizational values rather than external imposition.

The NCP-Jamaat alliance represents more than a political calculation—it symbolizes the ongoing struggle between principle and pragmatism in post-colonial democracies. How this alliance evolves will reveal much about whether emerging political movements can maintain their soul while navigating the treacherous waters of electoral politics. The hope remains that parties like NCP will rediscover their moral compass before completely losing their revolutionary character to the seductive logic of political expediency.