What is the true legacy of a political leader? Position, power, party, or is it certain political values that continue to influence society even after their death? What did Begum Khaleda Zia leave behind for Bangladesh's politics? To answer this question, a dispassionate evaluation of her political life is necessary.
Multi-party democracy, the parliamentary system of government, nationalist politics, the organizational foundation of the BNP, and a long history of political resistance—all are part of her legacy. But there is a thread running through these. That thread is faith in electoral politics and the culture of political resistance against power.
Khaleda Zia's political rise was not conventional. She entered politics after the assassination of her husband, President Ziaur Rahman. She had no political training. She lacked long-term organizational experience; but she had determination. She had the ability to connect with people. She had the courage to make decisions in difficult times. Thus, she transformed from the leader of the BNP to one of the primary figures in national politics. Her first major legacy is tied to democratic politics. She was one of the foremost leaders in the anti-Ershad movement. An uncompromising leader.
The 1990 mass uprising ended military rule. Subsequently, the BNP won the 1991 elections. A more significant event followed. Through the Twelfth Amendment, Bangladesh transitioned from a presidential system back to a parliamentary system. Khaleda Zia became the first Prime Minister under this parliamentary system. One point needs clarification: parliamentary democracy was not solely Khaleda Zia's creation; it was a result of mass movements, consensus among political parties, and historical circumstances. However, she was the central political figure in this change. Without her leadership, the history of this transition would be incomplete. Therefore, she can be called the primary political architect of the re-establishment of the parliamentary system.
Political scientist Rounaq Jahan, analyzing Bangladesh's democratic journey, views the post-1990 period as part of the 'third wave' of democracy. Her observation is crucial. For democracy to become institutionalized, political parties themselves must also be democratic. This applies to evaluating Khaleda Zia's legacy as well. Because democracy is not merely a change of government. The true test of democracy lies in institutions, parties, parliament, elections, and political behavior.
Khaleda Zia's second major legacy is transforming the BNP into a lasting national political force. The party established by Ziaur Rahman gained new political life under her leadership. She did not merely maintain it as an electoral organization; she strengthened its organizational roots across various regions of the country. Its associate bodies—including the student wing (Jatiyatabadi Chhatra Dal), youth wing (Jatiyatabadi Jubo Dal), and volunteer wing—expanded. At one time, the Chhatra Dal was one of the country's most powerful student organizations. Consequently, the BNP had the opportunity to evolve into a broad political organization.
The third legacy is nationalist politics. One of the foundations of Khaleda Zia's political philosophy was 'Bangladeshi nationalism.' She believed that national identity should be constructed by embracing the distinctiveness of Bangladesh's own history, territory, culture, independence, and sovereignty. She did not merely articulate this political current in speeches; she worked to establish and expand it throughout her long political career. Under her leadership, the BNP turned 'Bangladeshi nationalism' into one of the country's primary political ideologies. She repeatedly sought public support for this ideology. She contested elections. She fought on the streets. She did not change her stance even in the face of adversity. Under Khaleda Zia's leadership, the BNP transformed that nationalist identity into a powerful language of electoral politics. As a result, 'Bangladeshi nationalism' did not remain just a political slogan for the BNP; it became a significant part of Khaleda Zia's political legacy. For her followers, it remains a primary foundation of political identity today.
The fourth legacy is her 'uncompromising' political character. This identity is not merely political rhetoric. Behind it lies a long history. From the anti-Ershad movement to subsequent street protests against the ruling parties, she did not shy away from conflict. During the time of fascist Sheikh Hasina, amidst cases, imprisonment, political pressure, persecution, and illness, her political stance often remained unwavering. In this, she became a figure of resistance for the new generation.
Another important aspect of Khaleda Zia's political legacy is her belief in electoral politics. She participated in numerous elections. Her party won and lost. It returned to power again. For her, the people's vote was the primary basis of political legitimacy. The idea that the source of power is the people was central to her political position. This holds immense significance in Bangladesh's politics, where a crisis of confidence in elections has persisted for a long time. When questions arise about voting rights, they also challenge the legitimacy of the state. Political scientist Ali Riaz, in his discussions on democracy in Bangladesh, repeatedly emphasizes the importance of voting rights and political participation. The crux of his observation is that democracy is not an abstract concept for the people of Bangladesh; it is their political right. Therefore, if voting rights are curtailed, democracy itself shrinks. This aspect of Khaleda Zia's politics is also important for the youth. Because voting is not just about electing a government; it is the right to make decisions about one's own future. This belief will remain a significant chapter in Khaleda Zia's political legacy. This legacy of her politics remains relevant today, especially for the new generation.
This very question makes her legacy compelling. Her political influence was extraordinary. She led one of Bangladesh's two primary political streams for decades. Her conflict with fascist Hasina reshaped the country's political structure. This two-party rivalry has both increased political participation and intensified polarization. Recent research has also linked Khaleda Zia's legacy to political polarization and conflict, alongside democracy; but this propaganda yielded no benefit. It has been proven that Khaleda Zia was right. The results are also evident. Sheikh Hasina has fled. Khaleda Zia has taken her final leave, adorned with respect, dignity, and the immense love and reverence of the people.
Ultimately, the question returns to the youth. What will the new generation take from Khaleda Zia? Only party loyalty? Political legacy? Or courage, voting rights, state accountability, and the mindset to stand against injustice? The appeal her combative character has generated among the youth of July is also significant here.
Khaleda Zia's greatest legacy is not any single institution or slogan; she left behind a political possibility. The possibility of changing power through the people's vote. The possibility of standing against military rule. The possibility of sustaining a major political party over a long period. Alongside, the possibility of surviving in politics amidst adversity.
But legacy does not only mean achievement; it also means responsibility. This responsibility is immense for the BNP. Doing politics in Khaleda Zia's name is easy. Implementing her political ideals is difficult. If democracy is desired, there must be democracy within the party as well. If voting rights are demanded, the voting rights of opponents must also be respected. If a parliamentary system is sought, parliament must be made effective. If accountability is demanded, one's own party must also be brought under its purview.
One legacy must be viewed separately. That is the legacy of women's leadership. Women's leadership is not new in Bangladesh's politics; but the nature of Khaleda Zia's political rise was different. She did not start with a long political lineage. Yet, she rose to the center of a male-dominated political framework. She became Prime Minister three times. She played the role of the main opposition leader for a long time. Countless women saw in her a reflection of their own strength. The aspect of her popularity cannot be explained solely by emotion; it also signifies a significant shift in Bangladesh's social reality. Khaleda Zia set a precedent that a woman can endure severe political conflict and remain at the pinnacle of state power. This legacy is also important for future generations of female politicians. At the same time, her life has shown that while it is possible to run a party for a long time with personal charisma, the legacy faces crisis if institutions are not strengthened. Therefore, remembering Khaleda Zia is not just about recalling her tenacity; it also means learning lessons from her experience about building political institutions. Because individuals pass away; institutions endure. And sustainable democracy ultimately rests not on individuals, but on strong institutions.
This lesson is even more urgent today. Bangladesh's politics has often been personality-centric. As a result, leaders have changed, but the political culture has not. If Khaleda Zia's legacy is truly to endure, it will not be through personality cults. It will endure through democratic institutions, a tolerant political culture, and the highest regard for the people's decisions. This will be the greatest tribute to her.
The greatest tribute to Khaleda Zia will be to take the difficult test of her political legacy. The answer to the question of what she left behind will not only be given by history; the future politics of the BNP will also provide it. That answer will not depend on how many times the party chants her name; it will depend on how much it can truly uphold her most important teachings—the people's vote, democracy, political freedom, and the right to resistance.
Khaleda Zia has passed away. Her political chapter has ended; but her legacy is not yet over. It is now in the hands of Bangladesh's politics.
Author: Former General Secretary, Dhaka Journalists Union
