Fight against extremism

Because, the main rival Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) boycotted the election. In the last election held in January 2024, the voter turnout was only 40 percent. Opposition voices were suppressed.

There has been significant development in Bangladesh during the tenure of Hasina, the female head of government who has been ruling for a long time in the contemporary world. Bangladesh, which was struggling to provide food to its citizens in 2006, became a food exporter in 2022, turning its GDP from $71 billion to $460 billion today. Bangladesh is the largest economy in South Asia after India. Since 2009, Bangladesh has maintained an average annual growth rate of 6 percent. Bangladesh is now famous as the garment center of the world. He is also known as the 'Bay of Bengal Miracle'.

Hasina initially won praise from Western powers and others for banning domestic extremist Muslim groups. But his zero-tolerance for political dissent led to discontent within the country, and increased interventionist interest from Western powers as well. There are some claims that the United States wanted to build a base on St. Martin Island, 7 kilometers south of Cox's Bazar, and then merge parts of Bangladesh, Myanmar, and India to form a new Christian state, and that it was laughed at. However, there does not seem to be any basis for this to be confirmed.

Bangladesh was becoming an example of how geopolitical balance should be. In particular, Hasina was used as an example of balancing India and China in the interests of Bangladesh. Under BRI, she has worked on some important projects such as construction of India-Bangladesh Friendship Pipeline and Friendship Thermal Power Plant with the help of India. Now she is taking refuge in India, while China is seen to be trusting the interim government led by Mohammad Younis. There are reports that the Chinese ambassador in Dhaka has already met the leaders of Jamaat-e-Islami.

During 15 consecutive years of rule, there was development but the freedom of the citizens was curtailed. Looking at the history of countries that have made comparable leaps in development, one commonality is that those countries have exercised some form of authoritarian rule. However, totalitarianism has no place in today's world. Before the advent of democracy, the world was in the possession of dictatorship and the development was also happening at the same level - all over Europe, America, Asia. Seeking more freedom to exercise is after the supply of basic needs. The development of mental consciousness is the foundation of physical consciousness.

is not just about development. Regrettably, the world's great democracies continue to approve self-serving autocracies. When their interests are violated, then under the guise of freedom, those countries and rulers are treated as autocrats and the politics of restriction begins. One extremism is not an alternative to another extremism, but great democrats continue to practice the same in any other country than their own. The countries that have gone through it are now trapped in eternal civil war. In Bangladesh, the alternative to Hasina's extremism seems to be another extremism. Because in 1971, under whose leadership Bangladesh was formed from East Pakistan, he was overthrown. After getting the father of the nation, Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, there is no way to say that the new government will practice liberalism. Trust me, that won't happen.

Every country has its own characteristics. The situation of Nepal cannot be compared with the incident of Hasina being chased from Bangladesh. Even though Nepal is relatively behind in development, Nepal is one of the countries that practice more freedom as a developed society. Again, religious tolerance and communal harmony are great strengths of Nepal. That's why there was a scandal in Bangladesh, the same thing will happen or should happen in Nepal and the effort that is being made to inflame the situation by creating such a gathering by force will make those who want to bake bread of selfishness by creating a vicious circle of instability in the country. It is argued here that the solution to

extremism is not another extremism. The policy of liberalism and mediation adopted by Prime Minister Oli against the provocations that the political characters within the country are trying to create has been discussed here.

Let's start with Prachanda's provocative and provocative politics. After leaving power, Prachanda, who has become bitter, has targeted Prime Minister Oli. The 'factor' that motivates him to play such games is the greed of being able to be a part of power again while standing in Deuba's defense. Those outside of power are frightened by insecurity and fear. That haste is being seen now, from Parliament to the streets. To say that a situation like Sri Lanka and Bangladesh can happen in Nepal is to wish for the same. His understanding of trying to run the rule of two-party authoritarianism with the strength of power is apolitical, calling the government of two major parties undemocratic and against the constitution. He is trying to transform the pain of

, i.e. the sudden overthrow of power, into the creation of an inflammatory and provocative situation. First, Prachanda has lost the position, power and authority to make such an appeal to the citizens. Therefore, even if he tries to turn the society towards extremism, now he himself will go into that pit. Secondly, among the characters of contemporary politics, Prachanda is such a character, who has earned more infamy in the relatively short power politics. He could not decide to make any historical contribution to the country when he was Prime Minister for three times. He has been accused of imprisoning power in the clutches of the family. Thirdly, let's say, if citizens protest against leaders like in Bangladesh and Sri Lanka, Prachanda will probably be the first target. Because, the persecuted by Prachanda are within the Maoists.

Therefore, it is appropriate for his life to convey the message that he is a character of responsible politics rather than pushing the nation towards extremism in the political aftermath. Now Prachanda's politics is about to end, keeping in mind that it is in his interest to contribute to turning the society towards peace, unity and harmony, not towards violence, incitement and extremism. Why did the leaders in his party leave the Maoists, why are they still leaving and why is his party becoming like a Jan Morcha after the huge public vote in 2064 has fallen, Prachanda is trying to hide.

There is no situation where Prachanda or anyone from Nepal can replace the two main parties and immediately turn the country towards relative stability and 'moderate' politics. Ravi Lamichhan's co-operative scandal can destroy the RASWP, and Mukul Dhakal's revelation will destroy it. He who stood for seven years in Ravi's protection is about to finish him today. In that sense, perhaps no one else knows Lamichhane as much as Mukul.

Now in Kathmandu Mayor Balen Shah is trying to attack the parties by making it a standard, it is not 'rational', it is only viral. Balen is a person, not a party. His policy of banning the poor within Kathmandu is regrettable. Balen is weakened by the thought that everything he thinks is true and cannot be questioned. Looking at the matter, no structure can be built more than 20 meters above the prescribed standards on the banks of rivers and streams in Kathmandu. Deputy Mayor Sunita Dangol disagrees with this decision. In other words, public opinion will not increase only if the leader of the big party is exposed.

The country has not sought any form of extremism at this time. Extremism in any form must be turned into liberalism. Oli has always waged jihad against political extremism as a prime minister, party chairman or an influential leader of the party. Oli is the one who publicly protested against the Nepali National Army during the armed uprising and after the peace process, when the Nepali National Army was being attacked as a 'rapist and murderous army'. Oli is the leader who stands against the Nepalese army when they try to take hostages or drag them into disputes.

Against the Maoist and western game of dividing the country into different ethnic states in the name of federalism, the leader who tries to create an ethnic caucus in the parliament should not engage in the creation of such separate groups and with the conclusion that a Madhesh province is guided by the strategic goal of strategically dividing the southern part of Nepal. Oli is If the constitution was not promulgated on October 3, he took a stand by assessing where politics would have gone.

dr. Prime Minister Oli believes that the legitimate demands of Madhesh can be addressed through peaceful competition by bringing Sike Raut's separatist group into the constitutional mainstream. The increase in public opinion of UML in Madhesh and Oli becoming more popular is due to the priority given to the development of Madhesh. In the same way, Oli is also the one who, being Prachanda's rebel, has returned to violence to find a solution outside of the constitution and brought it to the peaceful mainstream. Federalism cannot be thrown away in Nepal now, nor can Hindu Rashtra be restored. The situation in Nepal is not as desired by those who entered politics with such extreme views. Yes, for comparative stability, we should move forward by maintaining consensus on issues including reforming the electoral system, which is now led by Oli.

There has been an attempt by a leader who has benefited more than his capacity in politics and is now despised by the people to create an insurgent group under a new guise and use it to spread terror. But such a failed and abandoned leadership is brought to the fore by the citizens. Logically, the adversary is often more powerful. Therefore, former Prime Ministers and Ministers who want to do irresponsible politics against the government can assume different guises and create directed violence on the streets. The government should be aware of that. There is a tendency to blame others by chanting chaotic slogans on the streets. There are signs of eating cucumbers and sticking seeds on other people's foreheads.

Not only in Nepal, extremism is emerging as a challenge in the world. Nepal is not looking for extremist politics now, Nepali society is not an extremist society either. Prohibition or elimination of an idea, a group will not solve the problem. While the Prime Minister is identifying the problem and trying to solve it, there are provocative political attempts to turn it towards extremism. "Moderate" politics will succeed only when they fail.