What the Jamaat-NCP pact says about ‘new’ politics

One might have assumed that after a year and a half of political upheaval since a mass uprising that toppled a long-standing government, Bangladesh's political landscape was ready for fresh ideas and directions. Instead, with less than six weeks to go before the February 12 election, that era of youthful promise seems to have evolved into a scene rather reminiscent of an old television drama rebooted with new costumes. The National Citizen Party (NCP), once hailed as the fresh hope of reform, has now joined hands with an alliance led by Jamaat-e-Islami, a party whose past still casts a long and controversial shadow.

The story reads a bit like a political plot twist no one asked for. NCP, since its emergence in late February, positioned itself as a youth-driven alternative to the traditional duopoly of Awami League and BNP. Early on, it offered ample rhetoric about systemic reform, anti-corruption, and a break from old power matrices. These were bold claims in a political culture that is often described as stagnant. Fast forward 10 months, and that new kid on the block is agreeing seat allocations with Jamaat and a cluster of smaller parties that have long existed at the periphery of mainstream politics.

To the casual observer, this may seem like mere political horse-trading, the sort of backroom arrangement typical in multi-party systems everywhere. But context matters. According to recent surveys, the NCP was itself struggling to convert early excitement surrounding its emergence into real voter support. An International Republican Institute survey found that only about six percent of voters said they would back NCP in elections. In the same poll, Jamaat got around 29 percent, and BNP led with 33 percent support.

Read more

Tarique Rahman’s return, and the Kundera-esque weight of expectations

That means NCP's popularity is hovering just above the noise level of electoral politics in a country of 13 crore people. It is a number that most startup politicians would find humbling. Yet, rather than doubling down on its reformist agenda to assert its identity and expand its voter base, NCP appears to have recalibrated its strategy towards survival through alliance. With Jamaat's support base far stronger, at least on paper, and its deep roots in certain regions, NCP's decision might seem like shrewd pragmatism. After all, as the adage goes, politics is the art of the possible. But then again, there is political credibility, and that is much harder to reclaim once spent.

So, what exactly does this alliance say to the voters who believed in NCP's promise of "new politics"? For one, it suggests that ideological clarity was always negotiable. If the initial attraction to NCP for many was its youthful energy and commitment to break with the past, those qualities now look to be filtered through the very traditional political calculus it once critiqued. The youthful supporters it once courted are now left with a choice between cynicism and disillusionment, watching as the party they backed moves into a coalition with a group whose historical baggage remains contentious.

This alliance is not merely an electoral arrangement. It is symbolic. It tells voters that electoral arithmetic matters more than narrative coherence. That might make sense to party strategists upset with internal dissent and resignations, but it does not necessarily translate into fresh trust on the ground.

NCP's leaders, understandably, may argue that coalition building is part and parcel of democratic politics. They might say that in a fragmented landscape, working with like-minded forces is pragmatic. They stress that the pact is strictly for electoral purposes. Indeed, an NCP statement insisted it joined the alliance only because it "cannot contest the election alone" under current conditions.

That is a fair admission. But the subtle sarcasm here lies in the fact that a party born from popular uprising and aspirations for bold reform now finds itself in an alliance similar to the older coalitions that many young voters judged negatively.

Read more

Is the NCP becoming what it once rejected?

This move also reveals something about the limits of new party formation in Bangladesh. The political landscape continues to be shaped by entrenched loyalties, regional patronage networks, and historical narratives that are hard to disrupt with slogans alone. If nearly half of voters are unsure about whom to support, it suggests there is an appetite for alternatives. NCP could have tried to seize this space by doubling down on its distinct identity.

Of course, Jamaat has its own story to tell. The party's registration was restored by the Supreme Court earlier in 2025 after years of legal challenges, allowing it once again to contest elections. But there is a stark contrast between a party that has built steadily over decades and one that emerged as a symbol of generational change. Merging the two suggests that NCP's leadership believes it can borrow credibility from Jamaat's base. But credibility, unlike vote percentages, cannot simply be transferred.

The calculus also ignores a basic political truth: alliances shift perceptions more than they shift vote banks. A young supporter who once saw NCP as a break from the past might now view it as willing to drift back into the familiar currents it once criticised. And for older voters who might have been sceptical of NCP's experience, the alliance might confirm their doubts. In other words, what this pact may gain in short-term organisational reach, it risks losing in long-term distinctiveness.

Internal dissent within the NCP further complicates this picture. Resignations by some key members following the alliance announcement suggest that not everyone within the party shares the leadership's calculation. Such internal fractures rarely go unnoticed by the public. Perceptions of disunity can be just as damaging as poor policy articulation.

Critically, this alliance underscores how difficult it is for new political entities to maintain momentum in Bangladesh. The NCP emerged amid a moment of national flux. But many factors, including the political inertia, institutional barriers, and the gravitational pull of established players, have made it hard for that moment to translate into lasting influence. The youth vote that once seemed so promising has proven to be elusive in structured electoral politics. That is not to say that it will never materialise. But as of now, the NCP's stochastic slide into alliance with Jamaat raises questions about where that energy went.

Some might say that politics means compromise and that strategic alliances are unavoidable. They might argue that no party is an island and that all political actors must navigate complex terrains to survive. That may well be true. But there is a distinction between strategic coalition building and strategic betrayal of the founding ethos. When a party born of protest abandons its reformist posture to embrace the very actors and systems it once seemed to stand apart from, voters are left asking a simple question: what, exactly, does this party now stand for?

H. M. Nazmul Alam is an academic, journalist, and political analyst. Currently, he teaches at International University of Business Agriculture and Technology (IUBAT), and can be reached at [email protected].

Views expressed in this article are the author's own. 

Follow The Daily Star Opinion on Facebook for the latest opinions, commentaries, and analyses by experts and professionals. To contribute your article or letter to The Daily Star Opinion, see our guidelines for submission.