For a long time, elections have been surrounded by an atmosphere of distrust, fear, and uncertainty. Restoring public confidence has now become the greatest challenge. In this context, the decision to deploy nearly one hundred thousand members of the armed forces in the upcoming national election has sparked new hope. Such a decision is instilling confidence among voters and strengthening the prospects of an acceptable and participatory election.
The role of the armed forces in Bangladesh's electoral history is not new. In various past elections, they have worked as a supportive force in maintaining law and order. However, in recent years, political violence, mob culture, questions over administrative neutrality, and allegations of polling center capture have frightened ordinary voters.
The fear of being harassed while casting a vote and the anxiety of not being able to vote for one's preferred candidate have significantly reduced people's enthusiasm for voting. In this reality, the visible and regulated presence of the armed forces has become a kind of psychological reassurance for many.
In fact, the armed forces enjoy a historically rooted trust among the general people of Bangladesh. From rescue operations during natural disasters to professionalism and discipline during national crises, they have proven themselves time and again. On the other hand, when this institution-remaining outside political controversy-takes on a supportive role during elections, voters feel that at least they will be safe when they go to polling centers.
I believe this sense of security is one of the fundamental prerequisites of democracy. Because without security, it is impossible for anyone to freely express their opinion.
Here, one issue needs to be clarified. The deployment of the armed forces does not mean militarization of the election in any way. According to the constitution, the full responsibility for conducting elections rests with the Election Commission. The armed forces operate under the civilian administration, on the orders of magistrates, and to assist law enforcement agencies. The more transparently this structure functions, the greater public confidence will grow. The Election Commission has already conveyed that the armed forces will remain neutral and will not interfere in the voting process. I believe this should be seen as a positive signal.
Another important point needs to be mentioned here: although the armed forces did not have magistracy powers in previous elections, this time they are being granted such authority.
Another significant positive aspect surrounding the upcoming election is that many candidates have regained their candidacy through the appeal process. When those who were initially rejected in preliminary scrutiny receive justice through legal and institutional processes, confidence in the Election Commission increases among all concerned. This proves that elections are not only for the ruling or influential groups, but are open to every eligible citizen. When there is multidimensional competition, voters truly have choices. This competitive environment is the real lifeblood of elections.
Electoral uncertainty mainly arises from two factors-fear of violence and irregularities. The presence of the armed forces can play a preventive role in both areas. Incidents such as polling center capture, ballot snatching, or intimidation become far more difficult to carry out.
At the same time, those within the administration who may want to behave in a partisan manner receive a strong message that the situation is being closely monitored. This psychological impact often proves even more effective than physical security itself.
From an international standards perspective, this issue is also important. The main conditions for a globally acceptable election are security, participation, and transparency. In many developing countries, military or paramilitary forces play a supportive role during elections. There are precedents in India, Nepal, Indonesia, and many other countries. The main question there is not the presence of the forces, but their conduct and accountability. If Bangladesh can learn from these experiences and ensure a professional and limited role, the acceptability of its elections in the international arena will undoubtedly increase.
Restoring voter confidence requires more than just security. The activism of the Election Commission, media freedom, and responsible behavior by political parties are equally important. However, the reality is that without security, all other initiatives become fragile. Because if a voter is afraid to go to the polling center, codes of conduct or advanced technologies hold no value for them. This is where the role of the armed forces creates a foundation upon which the rest of the democratic structure can stand.
Another hopeful sign in this election is the change in voter attitudes. After a long time, people are again discussing who will win, what programs will be offered, and what kind of parliament will emerge. Such discussions become meaningful only when people believe that their votes matter. The decision to deploy the armed forces is significantly reviving that belief. This is not a stance in favor of any party or individual, but a position in favor of protecting voting rights.
It would not be an exaggeration to say that Bangladesh's democracy now stands at a crossroads. On one side lies the distrust and division of the past; on the other, a desire for a new beginning. If a relatively peaceful, participatory, and acceptable election can be held at this juncture, it will not merely be a process of forming a government. Rather, it will mark the beginning of national reconstruction. In that journey, the supportive role of the armed forces is, in my view, a realistic and timely decision.
I believe that ultimately, whether the election will be successful or not largely depends on the collective sense of responsibility of all. The Election Commission must remain firm in exercising its constitutional authority. Political parties must avoid violence and approach the people. The administration and law enforcement agencies must remain neutral. And the armed forces must, through their professionalism and discipline, once again become a symbol of trust for voters.
If all these conditions are met, it can be said that elections will once again regain their old character-a festive atmosphere. That is, voters will believe that they will be safe if they go to polling centers, their votes will be counted, and their decisions will determine the future of the state. Therefore, I believe that this trust of voters is the true strength of democracy.
The writer is a journalist and political analyst
