Jamaat-e-Islami Bangladesh and the Limits of Islamist Electoral Politics |
The recent electoral performance of Bangladesh Jamaat-e-Islami has revived an old debate: are Islamists structurally incapable of winning national elections, or was Jamaat’s perceived rise a misreading of political reality? In the last couple of months during the election campaign, a number of national and international media outlets have portrayed Jamaat as a significant force in the upcoming general elections, bolstered by youth support through its student wing, Islami Chattra Shibir, which has gained influence among student leaders, achieved positive results in campus elections, and taken advantage of the political vacuum left by the Awami League. However, the results at the polling station presented a different picture.
Was the hype misplaced? Or was it part of a broader narrative that simultaneously inflated and demonized Islamist prospects? The answer lies not in a binary of “Islamist failure” versus “secularist victory,” or in this case, religiously not rigid BNP victory, but in a deeper structural analysis of history, political sociology, and strategic adaptation.
The Campus victory and the National Mood
Much of the perception of Jamaat’s resurgence emerged from its visible presence in university spaces and urban youth networks. In moments of political upheaval, campuses often serve as laboratories of broader ideological contest.
But student activism does not automatically translate into mass votes, nor does online enthusiasm convert into constituency-level organization.
But student activism does not automatically translate into mass votes, nor does online enthusiasm convert into constituency-level organization.
Bangladesh’s electorate is socially and economically diverse. Urban, literate, uprising-driven youth represent only one segment of the national mosaic. The conflation of campus victories with nationwide momentum was a classic case of mistaking intensity for breadth.
In this sense, the narrative of Jamaat as a “fierce contender” may have reflected a projection, by both supporters eager for revival and critics anxious about Islamist ascendancy.
No analysis of Jamaat’s political fate can avert 1971. The liberation struggle is not merely a historical episode; it is the very foundation of Bangladesh’s state identity. From the beginning, Jamaat has been unable to shed the burden of its wartime positioning. Even for the current generation, whose political consciousness is shaped more by economic ambition and the dream of a prosperous future than by liberation memory, the hegemonic institutional narrative of 1971 remains powerful.
In electoral politics, perception often outshines doctrinal transformation. Jamaat may have recalibrated aspects of its discourse, but its image remains intertwined with a historical controversy that rivals strategically revive.
In electoral politics, perception often outshines doctrinal transformation. Jamaat may have recalibrated aspects of its discourse, but its image remains intertwined with a historical controversy that rivals strategically revive.
Unlike other Islamist movements that emerged after the creation of Bangladesh, Jamaat operates under the shadow of a national founding trauma. This historical disadvantage was always there.
READ: Bangladesh top court restores Jamaat-e-Islami’s party registration
Competing Within the Religious Field
The tendency to frame elections as Islamists versus secularists oversimplifies the real diversity of the groups. As the author of Maududi and the Making of Islamic Revivalism and an expert on Jamat-e-Islami, Professor Vali Nasr, has argued, although in the context more specific to Jamat-e-Islami Pakistan, the Islamists do not compete solely against secular actors; they also contend with other religious and nationalist forces that have similar constituencies as the core area to be tapped.
In Bangladesh, Jamaat is in direct competition with the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP), which uses a form of cultural nationalism that accommodates Islamic symbolism without being Islamist at the core.
In Bangladesh, Jamaat is in direct competition with the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP), which uses a form of cultural nationalism that accommodates Islamic symbolism without being Islamist at the core.
BNP’s wider coalition base, stretching across rural circles, business elites, and pragmatic power brokers, gives it flexibility Jamaat seems to be lacking.
Religious voters are not a homogeneous group. A big chunk prioritizes stability, economic management, and nationalist framing over ideological purity. Additionally, other religious groups have historical ideological and doctrinal differences with Jamaat. Jamaat’s disciplined cadre is an organizational strength, but it can also limit coalition elasticity.
The Perception Barrier: Women, Minorities, and Modernity
Another obstacle at the very level of structure lies in branding. Jamaat is frequently framed, domestically and in international media ecosystems, as anti-women, anti-minority, and socially conservative to a fault. Whether these portrayals are entirely accurate is secondary. Electoral politics operates on narratives, and narratives have a role in shaping trust.
Bangladesh’s development journey, particularly in the education of females and employment in the garment sector, has changed gender dynamics. Any party perceived as threatening these gains has to face skepticism among large swaths of voters.
Similarly, minority Hindus often view Islamist resurgence through the prism of regional anxieties. The portrayal of Jamaat as a destabilizing force in most of Indian media reiterates this perception, even if it does not directly determine votes.
Geopolitics and the Comfort Factor
Regional and global networks deeply interconnect Bangladesh’s political economy. India, Western powers, and China all have stakes in Dhaka’s political stability. While it would be simplistic to say that external actors “prevented” a Jamaat resurgence, it is undeniable that geopolitical comfort influences diplomatic signaling and economic confidence.
Islamist parties often face an additional inroad: the need to reassure international investors and neighboring states that ideological commitments will not lead to disruption in macroeconomic continuity. Even a perception of unpredictability can push elite alignments toward more familiar actors.
Still, systemic pressure from the external players alone cannot explain electoral defeat. Without domestic resonance, no amount of foreign discomfort determines outcomes.
READ: Bangladesh PM Hasina resigned and left the country, media reports say
Islamist Transformation: Incomplete or Insufficient?
Over the past two decades, many Islamist parties have undergone ideological evolution. The Tunisian Ennahda Movement, under the leadership of imprisoned Rached Ghannouchi, consciously separated its religious (dawah) works from its political party race, seeking to present itself as a model of “Muslim Democrat” formation. Turkey’s Justice and Development Party (AKP) similarly reframed Islamist roots within a nationalist-developmentalist lexicon. Morocco’s Justice and Development Party adopted, by and large, similar strategic steps.
The lesson from these cases is not that Islamists necessarily win, but that they succeed in elections when they widen their appeal beyond ideological constituencies. They normalize specific nationalist characteristics, including minorities, emphasize governance competence, and present doctrinal positions that link them to overall human development rather than mere rhetoric.
Has Jamaat fully internalized this transformation? Has Jamaat tactically moderated its language without restructuring its organization and coalition strategy? If ideological recalibration is not matched by institutional reform, the transition remains incomplete.
The Structural Dilemma: Vanguard or National Party?
At its core, Jamaat faces a strategic intersection. Historically modeled as a disciplined, ideologically driven movement, it retains characteristics of a vanguard organization. Electoral politics, however, rewards broad-based porous coalitions and ideological flexibility, which sometimes characterize compromise with practical political imperatives.
One frequently cited model is the division between the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) and the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), where socio-religious mobilization functions separately from electoral competition. Yet the analogy has limits. Hindutva operates within a Hindu-majority national frame; Jamaat functions in a Muslim-majority state whose nationalism is anchored in a liberation struggle against Pakistan. Transplanting organizational models without accounting for historical context risks strategic miscalculation.
The more pressing question is whether Jamaat is willing to transform into a broad-based national party whose Islamic roots inform ethics and principles rather than dictate programmatic rigidity that doesn’t allow practical maneuvering.
Is This the Failure of Islamism?
The defeat of one party does not constitute the exhaustion of an ideological current. Islamist politics has repeatedly demonstrated steadfastness across time and space. However, electoral ceilings do emerge when movements fail to adapt to changing social realities.
New demands on Islamism in the twenty-first century include global integration, minority participation, economic governance, and gender equality. Voters frequently evaluate parties more on their administrative prowess and capacity to meet their demands than on their religious purity and clarity. If there is one lesson to be learned from Jamaat’s failure, it is that broader coalition-building is always necessary before symbolic capital, whether it comes from moral positioning or college activism.
Beyond Demonization and Hype
The more complex reality is obscured when Jamaat is portrayed as either an unstoppable Islamist movement or a constant menace. Its electoral failure is not a result of the intrinsic inability of politics motivated by religion, but rather of structural limitations, historical burdens, coalition limitations, and strategic difficulties. Islamist groups adapt rather than vanish. It is not a question of whether Islamists can succeed, but rather of what circumstances will allow them to do so. According to the ruling, if change is to take place in Bangladesh, it must go beyond rhetoric. It needs to redefine national identity, organization, and narrative. Only then would it be possible to close the gap between electoral reality and hype.
OPINION: Yemen and the shifting alliances in the Middle East
The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.