I WAS at Dhaka one day after the carnage at Guwahati. The Bangladesh press had front-paged the tragedy and had roundly criticized the perpetrators. In a representative comment, the leading paper, The Daily Star, had said: “Such an act of cowardice snuffing out and maiming scores of innocent people in thickly crowded public places is utterly despicable. We have no words strong enough to condemn it.”

But people were horrified over the impression that the blasts were the handiwork of Bangladesh. They attributed the remark to the “hostility” of Indians towards the Bangladeshis. They conceded that relations between the two countries had never been as low as they were today. Yet they did not imagine India would say against Bangladesh what it said about Pakistan till yesterday.

Chief Adviser of the caretaker government, Fakhruddin Ahmed, said in an interview that he would not rule out some Bangladehis crossing into India. But to allege that there were training camps of terrorists or that the authorities connived at such activities was “very unfair to us and I deny all these charges categorically.” He said his government had been able to stop terrorism within its own country by taking appropriate measures. It was time that India realized that it had home grown terrorists.

Howsoever assuring the statements are from Dhaka, they have not removed the general impression in India that the Bangladeshis are behind the blasts. The suspicion is primarily on the Bangladeshis living in the country, said to be three million. Bangladesh is blamed because of the growing belief that it is a country where fundamentalism is spreading through mosques and madrassas coming up in the countryside.

I do not rule out some intelligence agencies at Dhaka conniving at the activities of extremists. There is possibly a group which is inimical to India. But that has been there whatever the colour of the government. Yet we would delude ourselves if we were to believe that the ULFA was returning to the path of peace. It is an outfit which is mixed up with every type of terrorism in the northeast. ULFA chairman Paresh Baruah lives at Dhaka. Some other important ULFA leaders have also taken refuge in the city. The government has arrested only Anup Chatia, a top ULFA leader. I have found no satisfactory reply to this.

My queries lead me to infer that the Guwahati incident is linked to the jihadis who have returned from Afghanistan after taking part in the “holy war” against American and European forces. But the motive of the jihadis is said to be money and the Pakistan’s ISI is said to be mixed up with their doings. Many intellectuals, journalists and some others I have met presented the same scenario. They even regret that the ISI is operating in a big way in the area. But they are so distant from India, as one editor puts it—“we are not even listening to each other because what we say sounds repetitive”—that joint action with New Delhi has never crossed their mind.

Yet like Pakistan, Bangladesh is resentful of India blaming outfits in their country without giving any evidence. Chief Adviser Ahmed wanted “some proof.” In fact, the best of our claims about cross-border terrorism or the involvement of extremists in Bangladesh have come to be doubted because we have not been able to produce even a shred of evidence in support of our case. Even within India, the version of police is questioned more and more because what is told is full of holes.

I am not sure whether Bangladesh is going the fundamentalist way. During four days of my stay at Dhaka, I did not find any woman in burqua, nor any slogan poster or banner invoking Islam or Allah. Music to which the extremists object is the breath of life in Dhaka. Painting and fashion shows are galore. The hanging of Bangla Bhai and his eight fundamentalist colleagues did not evoke any protest. Even the Jamiat-e-Islamia has, for the first time, acknowledged the contribution of liberation struggle to the independence of Bangladesh.

The real danger to Bangladesh is the lack of alternative to Awami Lealgue headed by Hasina and Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) headed by Khalida Zia. The Awami League looks like sweeping the polls scheduled to be held on December 18. At the same time, the common belief is that the BNP in the opposition will bring back on-the-street politics and hartals. If that happens, Bangladesh will be back to square one. The good work done by the caretaker government will go awry and the fight between the two ladies will begin in right earnest.

I concede that the army did try to overhaul the system while remaining in the background. It may have wished a political alternative. But the two ladies have been adamant on staying in politics, although both have been hurt by the exposures of corruption at high places.

The army is rightly withdrawing and letting people to decide. The problem, which Bangladesh has come to realise, like Pakistan, is that there is no halfway house. A country is either fully democratic or fully autocratic. The army intervening or pressuring the government from behind the scenes unhinges a democratic structure. People may be undisciplined or chaotic in their behaviour, but there is no alternative to the rule of people. Despite inept governance and trivialized politics, India has been able to establish democracy because people are inured to the system.

I see in Bangladesh a fierce desire to return to democracy. If elections had not been announced, people would have hit the streets in protest. But this is no answer to the country’s problems. The real test will come when one political party comes to power and the other has to wait till the next election.

Probably, both Awami League and BNP have learnt their lesson. Probably, both have come to realise that there is a Lakshman rehka beyond which no individual or party should stretch a democratic system. My feeling is that all the countries in South Asia, including India, have to ponder over the limit to which political parties can go to articulate their demand. Rulers do not suffer, the common man does. Religion is a diversion or a matter of personal faith. But it cannot occupy the centre stage. The political parties are not yet willing to face the simple truth: a distorted rule of law mars democracy not makes it.

Bangladesh has come full circle. Will the army ultimately walk in, I asked the Chief Adviser Ahmed. He said categorically: No. The institutions which have been built in the last two years, he said, will sustain the democratic structure. But the political parties will have to respect them.