The fallout from the National Congress Party’s (NCP) controversial alliance with Jamaat-e-Islami has reached a boiling point, leaving the party scrambling to reunite its fractured leadership. But here’s where it gets messy: despite desperate attempts to win back defectors, key leaders who resigned in protest are refusing to return unless the party cuts ties with Jamaat. This standoff raises critical questions about the NCP’s future and the principles at stake in Bangladeshi politics.
Since the alliance was announced, the NCP has been hemorrhaging talent. As of January 11, 2026, at least 15 high- and mid-ranking officials, including former senior joint member secretary Tasnim Jara and ex-joint convener Khaled Saifullah, have resigned. Six others withdrew their candidacies for the upcoming national election. Even those who haven’t officially left, like Senior Joint Convener Samanta Sharmeen and Joint Member Secretary Nahida Sarwar Niva, have gone silent, boycotting party activities in protest.
NCP Spokesperson Asif Mahmud insists the party is actively negotiating with the defectors, claiming, ‘We’re doing everything we can to bring them back.’ But here’s the part most people miss: Mahmud admits there are ‘underlying issues’ beyond mere disappointment—a vague admission that hints at deeper ideological rifts.
And this is where it gets controversial. The leaders who left aren’t buying it. They’ve dismissed Mahmud’s claims as ‘false and fabricated,’ accusing the party leadership of spinning a narrative to save face before the polls. At least five former leaders told The Daily Star that while they received calls from top officials like Convener Nahid Islam and Chief Coordinator Nasiruddin Patwary, no meaningful steps were taken to address their core concerns about the Jamaat alliance.
Khaled Saifullah, for instance, flatly denied any serious outreach: ‘I haven’t spoken to anyone about returning to the party.’ Dissident leaders describe the Jamaat alliance as a ‘premeditated, undemocratic deal,’ with one anonymous official calling it a ‘betrayal of the party’s founding principles.’
According to insiders, the alliance was pushed through under questionable circumstances. A December 24 meeting, convened via the executive committee’s WhatsApp group, was billed as a discussion on election strategy. However, many opponents of the alliance were conveniently absent, leaving only a handpicked group to approve the decision. ‘It was a sham,’ said one leader, ‘a majority of those present were already in favor.’
Here’s the kicker: Some leaders believe the alliance became easier to execute after the death of Inqilab Moncho spokesperson Sharif Osman Hadi, a vocal critic of Jamaat. This raises uncomfortable questions about timing and intent.
Take Farhad Alam Bhuiyan, former head of the NCP’s ICT cell. A non-political figure before the July uprising, he joined the NCP out of idealism, only to resign in disgust over the Jamaat alliance. ‘I couldn’t be part of this kind of politics,’ he said. Despite pressure from top leaders to return, Bhuiyan stands firm: ‘I won’t come back until the Jamaat ties are severed.’
The NCP’s attempts to resolve the crisis have been clumsy at best. An internal meeting to discuss reinstating the defectors was abruptly canceled after the schedule leaked—a blunder that underscores the party’s disarray. While leadership insists the door remains open, the defectors’ conditions are clear: no Jamaat, no return.
Founded in February 2025 by activists from the July uprising, the NCP has always prided itself on its progressive, grassroots ethos. But the Jamaat alliance has exposed deep fractures, leaving many to wonder: Can the party survive this ideological crisis? Or is this the beginning of the end for a once-promising movement?
What do you think? Is the NCP’s alliance with Jamaat a pragmatic political move or a betrayal of its core values? Should the defectors return, or are they right to stand their ground? Let us know in the comments—this debate is far from over.
