Which way is NCP’s new settlement going?

Illustration: TBS

When the National Citizen Party (NCP) entered Bangladesh's post-July political arena, it did so with unprecedented hope and goodwill. They began with an ambitious promise: a "new settlement" that would break from the transactional, old-style power politics of the past. 

Yet, their joining the Bangladesh Jamaat-e-Islami-led coalition has sparked major discussions regarding the direction of reforms and the dedication towards achieving a permanent change in our political culture. 

Multiple leaders have stepped down from the party, objecting to the alliance. And for critics and supporters, the alliance raises a deeper question on whether NCP's promise of political renewal has been overtaken by the very electoral arithmetic it once vowed to reject.

From 'new settlement' to familiar arithmetic

From its inception, NCP leaders repeatedly and publicly drew a clear red line: they would not align with any major or established political party, precisely because such alliances, they argued, represented the old political settlement they sought to dismantle.

"NCP wants to present itself as a party committed to women's rights and women's empowerment, and yet they are considering an alliance with a party that is comfortable with reduced working hours for women without any notion of equality and that has not nominated a single woman candidate so far."

Dr Asif Shahan, professor, Department of Development Studies, University of Dhaka

In multiple public forums, interviews, and statements following the July Uprising, NCP leaders framed their political project as an alternative to Bangladesh's entrenched binary system. The party's leadership consistently argued that meaningful reform was impossible if new political actors were absorbed into the existing alliance system dominated by major parties.

Mohammed Abdul Baten, assistant professor of Political Science and Sociology at North South University, argues that NCP's problem did not begin with the Jamaat alliance; it began much earlier, with conceptual incoherence.

"When the NCP leaders spoke of a 'Second Republic' or 'New Settlement', they were incoherent. Whatever occurred to individual leaders at a given moment was articulated randomly, without being organised coherently or collectively as a connected political group or unified rhetoric," he observes. "As a party, they were never able to clearly explain what exactly they meant by these concepts."

This lack of clarity, Baten argues, hollowed out the idea of a "new settlement" even before electoral negotiations began.

"As a result, neither then nor now has it been clear to us what 'New Settlement' actually means. Beyond rhetoric, we have not seen any direct action, ideological clarity, or principled positioning from them that would substantiate the promise of a 'New Settlement'."

When elections approached, that ambiguity translated into familiar political behaviour.

"When elections approached, we saw them revert to the old arrangement—electoral alliances driven by calculation, particularly their alliance with Jamaat. This was the same familiar logic of maximising advantage through coalition politics."

For Baten, the contradiction is not merely tactical but existential: voters may be told this is an electoral rather than ideological alliance, but in practice that distinction collapses.

"Whether one calls it an 'electoral understanding' or an 'alliance', the reality is that voters perceive it as a unified front. No voter casts ballots separately for 10 different manifestos. They see one unified coalition and vote for them," he adds.

Just an electoral alliance or ideological association?

Just days before finalising the Jamaat alliance, the party explored a new coalition with the AB Party and Rashtra Sangskar Andolon — an attempt that was quickly abandoned. Critics see this not as strategic flexibility but as evidence of improvisation and aiming for short-term gains. 

Asif Shahan, professor at the University of Dhaka, warns that an alliance with Jamaat could irreversibly damage NCP's political identity.

"The party is doomed," he states bluntly. "From the very beginning there has been a certain degree of skepticism about the party, namely that it is Jamaat's B team. Now, if NCP decides to go with Jamaat and openly embrace that position, it will not only validate this skepticism but also permanently taint the party."

Shahan argues that NCP's weak organisational structure makes it especially vulnerable within such an alliance.

"There is no way you [NCP] will be in the driver's seat in such an arrangement. The party will have to accept Jamaat's positions, Jamaat will push it further to the right, and NCP will be forced to accept and even celebrate Jamaat's narratives," he adds.

Dilara Chowdhury, professor and chair of the Department of Government and Politics at Jahangirnagar University, is more open about NCP's position. 

"In practical, on-the-ground electoral politics, a party cannot perform well without an organisation and a credible overarching leadership. That is simply the reality of vote-based politics." 

She adds, "From that practical experience, they initially tried to align with the BNP through a legal arrangement. Negotiations did begin, but the BNP was unwilling to allocate them a sufficient number of seats. Within the party, however, there are around thirty leaders who all want to contest elections. That created internal pressure. Moreover Jamaat will provide funds for them as well."  

"So, from their perspective," she argues, "this became a matter of electoral politics — plain and simple. Not ideological idealism, but voting arithmetic." 

Reform talks vs traditional practice

One of the most damaging aspects of the Jamaat alliance is how starkly it contrasts with NCP's reformist self-image. 

Asif Shahan highlights this contradiction in unusually direct terms.

"What about all the idealism, all the lectures about inclusivity, a new political settlement, a new Bangladesh?" he asks. "They took pride in being the only party serious about reform, and now they are joining hands with the party that used proportional representation in the Lower House to derail the entire reform discussion?"

Moreover, no discussion of Jamaat-e-Islami can avoid two enduring controversies: its role in 1971 and its position on women's rights. On both fronts, the alliance has proved politically toxic.

Shahan adds, "NCP wants to present itself as a party committed to women's rights and women's empowerment, and yet they are considering an alliance with a party that is comfortable with reduced working hours for women without any notion of equality and that has not nominated a single woman candidate so far." 

Baten adds that symbolism matters in post-uprising politics.

"The July Uprising was not just about regime change; it was about a new social contract, building an inclusive society where the state will respect and protect the rights of each and every individual irrespective of their religious, ethnic or gender identity."

Electoral rationality and the political cost

Defenders of the alliance argue that electoral politics is about survival, that NCP lacks the organisational depth to contest independently, and that alliances are inevitable. 

Dilara Chowdhury says, "Some parties enter constitutional politics first as platforms or pressure groups, attract public attention, and only later transition fully into electoral politics. The German Green Party followed such a trajectory, although that was a bottom-up process, whereas this appears to be top-down." 

She adds, "Perhaps they believe that once inside parliament, they will be able to organise the party more effectively. I should clarify that I have never had such discussions with them directly; this is my own analytical reading of the situation." 

Baten concedes the rationality of this logic — but not its consequences.

"From a rational-actor perspective, this decision is understandable. But when one compares their pragmatic choices with their earlier principled positions, the contradiction becomes stark.

"The July Uprising created a power vacuum after the ruler fled, producing a chaotic and unprecedented situation. In that chaos, many of us believed the NCP would serve as a cohesive, organising force — one that would provide direction and help lead the nation forward," he adds.

"Early on, they showed promise. The journey was not linear; there were highs and lows. Still, many of us remained hopeful that they would maintain their distinctiveness. By entering a broad alliance, that distinctiveness has suffered the greatest damage. They may gain some seats, but they have lost their uniqueness." 

Shahan is even more categorical.

"If NCP goes with Jamaat, it will help Jamaat, not them. It will give them a liberal cover, and in return, NCP will become a force for the right. NCP's centrist idea and ideology — already poorly defined — will simply vanish."

For a party born of uprising and expectation, the question now is whether electoral arithmetic has eclipsed political imagination — and whether voters will forgive that trade-off.

Shadique Mahbub Islam is a journalist.