The Hefazat leader who was found at an expensive resort with a woman who many are saying is/isn’t his wife is the biggest news in town. PM Sk. Hasina and other leaders have gone public saying that the lady in question is not his wife. Hefazat meanwhile has declared his marriage valid to the lady and his supporters have also supported that call.
On social media, no other subject has created so much interest and many are debating about the moral, privacy and human rights content of the obvious honey trap. But the one issues missed by some is politics. Unless one is truly innocent of the reality called Bangladesh one would not have been confused but politics is sometimes a multi-layered game and can be mysterious to many and most in different ways.
The rise of Hefazot has a major fact at work. Its material base is the rise of rural prosperity that has funded the group to the top. There are many supporters who ensure this social funding. But this also means such micro-funders have emerged in a new economic reality of relative prosperity. It’s a critical reality because it shows that economics and its power is working at the fundamental of the entire situation.
This Hefazat leader checked in at a resort which was expensive and it would be a significant part of many of his supporters’ daily income. But it shows that the said leader(s) is also not the pauperized rural maulana we are used to imagining. Relative prosperity across the board is the key and that has allowed a very different kind of lifestyle even for those who preach simplicity of lifestyle following the footsteps of the Prophet of Islam.
Many have read it as a condemnation of his sexual life particularly as it was assumed that the lady in question was not his wife. Hefazat has now rejected that accusation but his personal life now appears even more complicated as his wife apparently didn’t know and that makes it a crime in Bangladesh law. But the leader and its supporters may well say that they follow the law of Islam and not Bangladesh.
All these arguments and debates would however be easier to read if one remembers that the entire matter is about politics and control of institutions. The sexual and other issues are entirely incidental. The objective of the scenario managers was to trash the public image of the person concerned and in this they have been very successful. No matter what, the leader before and after the incident are worlds apart and Hefazat’s image itself has been diminished. Longer the debate continues in social media, grater the damage to the clergy body. Whether the leader rises or falls is immaterial, it’s the institution that has been damaged. And its aspiration to trump all others is now in serious doubt.
In the end, all that sex talk was largely about gaining and losing political leverage and the rest are all window dressing. That’s politics too.
