The objective of his plan is to bring the political leaders of sharply opposing views into a common fold. The name of the game is accommodation, political parties must accommodate each other and try to work together, a great idea indeed. The idea is new in Bangladesh but by no means original.

The idea of making accommodation a central theme in politics, especially when political parties are deeply divided is the cornerstone of what political scientists call "consociational democracy." The theory of consociational democracy is associated with Arendt Lijhphart, a Dutch political scientist.

That system was practiced with great success in Lebanon for many years, producing a stable political outcome and economic prosperity. In Lebanon, the agreement was if they have a Christian president, the prime minister must be a Sunni Muslim. This institutionalized accommodation worked well for decades before it ended in flames, as a civil war broke out. In the case of Lebanon, it was the meddling of neighbours that wrecked the system of consociational democracy.

In Bangladesh, the crying need is to create a political culture that will promote mutual respect and tolerance, without which democracy will continue to flounder. Profesor Yunus's plan should not be seen as a quick fix -- it is not a magic bullet and he knows that. He is realistic enough to suggest a temporary solution out of the stalemate. A suggestion, well-meaning but simple-minded.

His Nagorik committee reception was a political spectacle. Except for Mr. Abdullah Abu Sayeed, it looked like a reception accorded to him by BNP high command. He was flanked by Messrs Nazmul Huda and Mannan Bhuiyan, characters who like him made international community take notice of Bangladesh. But unlike Professor Yunus, they made Bangladesh famous for the wrong reasons -- corruption, for one.

Grameen is innovative in its emphasis on cooperation, discipline, and responsibility, although personally I was never a fan of chanting slogans and salutes. The essence of Grameen politics is accommodation. Making peace is always a great idea but it must be preceded by justice. A good mediator must listen to the grievances of the feuding parties and dispense justice with uncompromising honesty.

To impose a truce between one who committed wrong and one who was wronged, the perpetrators of crime and the victims of crime and injustice would be like forcing the victim of rape to make peace with her rapist. Sadly, in the grammo (village) politics in Bangladesh often that ends up as the outcome of grammo salish or rural justice. The victim is made to marry the rapist. Having had first hand experience of rural politics, I do not romanticize Gram Bangla. There are lot of injustices and sighs hidden under the beauty of Gram Bangla. We do have grammo justice or grammo (in)justice. Let's consider the recent logi-boitha story which BNP has made so much political capital of. But this is an aspect of grammo justice, or more appropriately, a response to accumulated injustices and grievances. People do such violent things only when the doors of justice are shut. All those who came with logi boitha were not aliens, nor were they hired thugs. Hired thugs came with guns concealed in their pockets. Why come so conspicuously? That spectacle was ugly to urbane sensibilities but it was an instance of grammo politics spilling into a metropolis. Bangladesh is dominated by the grammar of grammo politics.

The attack on the court is the most recent episode of that grammo politics. The court was defiled. But not on November 30. The process of defilement began long time ago with appointment of dubious characters as law minister, as state minister for law and the subsequent appointments of questionable men to the benches who undermined the principles of justice, fairness and decency. On November 30, there was an outburst against all these. I do not condone it but I try to understand the motives for such rowdiness. The former state minister of law had a Bangladeshi flag on his car. Why?

If we want to create a democratic political culture befitting the 21st century, we need to overcome the fetters of grammo politics. We need to see what is non-apparent, not just what is apparent.

Before condemning the exasperated lawyers who ransacked the judge's office. Ask: who undermined the judiciary? A village leader will have a lathial, with their lathis they will keep him in power by breaking the heads of his rivals.

In the national politics run from Dhaka by sleek politicians you still have lathis but these are invisible lathis carried by immoral bureaucrats, corrupt judges, and outlaw lawyers. Damaging office furniture is condemnable. But furniture can be replaced in no time. Destroying judiciary is morally reprehensible and cannot be fixed so easily.

We need to make a proper damage assessment and investigation. Here Professor Yunus can help. He is not afraid to speak the truth but he should address the truth and not its appearance, truth of the cause and not the symptoms. Grameen politics may be an ideal but right now the challenge is how to get out of grammo politics.

The author is a sociologist.