By Saifullah Syed
ROME, Aug 23 2024 (IPS)
The student movement in Bangladesh demanding reform of the quota system for public jobs was the straw that broke the camel’s back. The Awami League (AL) government led by Sheikh Hasina, in power continuously since 2008, collapsed on 5th August 2024. With Sheikh Hasina fleeing to India and leaving the country in disarray, her authoritarian rule of 15 years just melted away.
Saifullah Syed
She developed the personality cult of her father, Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, who led the country to independence in 1971 and who was brutally murdered on 15th of August 1975. The personality cult was so perverse that liberation of the country was attributed to Sheikh Mujib alone and all the other stalwarts of the liberation war and her party were ignored. Everything of significance happening in the country was attributed to his wisdom and foresight alone and were often named after him. Every Institution, including schools across the country and embassies around the world were obliged to host a “Mujib corner” to display his photo, and books about him only.
Yet, no political party, including the leading opposition Bangladesh National Party (BNP) succeeded in mobilising an uprising against Hasina’s regime. This was partly due her ability to project AL and her government as the sole guarantor of independence, sovereignty and secularism. Everyone else was cast as a supporter of anti-liberation forces, being communal, and accused of being motivated to turn the country into a hotbed of Islamic extremism. BNP was also accused of committing crimes and corruption when it was in power.
The founder of BNP is linked to the cruel murder of Sheikh Mujib and the members of her family, and the current leader of BNP is accused of masterminding the grenade attack aimed at killing Sheikh Hasina at an AL rally on 21st August 2004. Hasina survived the attack, but it killed 24 people and injured about 200.
Why did the student movement succeed ?
Like most historical events there are several factors, but the ultimate ones were that (i) the students were willing to die and (ii) the Military displayed patriotism and wisdom by refusing to kill. The students came from all walks of life, transcending party lines and economic background. Hence, attempts to cast them as anti-liberation did not succeed. The army refused to kill to protect a despotic ruler. Bangladeshis have always overthrown dictatorial rulers.
Why the students were ready to die and the army refused to kill are important issues for analysis but the critical question right now is: what next and where do we go from here ?
What Next for Bangladesh ?
The students have shown support for the formation of an interim government with leading intellectuals, scholars and elite liberal professionals and civil society actors under the leadership of Dr Younus, the founder of the Grameen Bank and a Nobel Laureate. These people were previously silenced and harassed during Hasina’s 15 year rule.
Many people remain sceptical, however. Many fear collapse of law and order and communal disturbances in the short run, which may lead to the emergence of another dictatorial rule. Neighbouring India, which supported Hasina’s government, is concerned about the rights of minorities in Bangladesh, although they showed scant concern for the minorities in India in the recent past.
Political and geo-political analysts are busy analysing the geo-political implications and the role of key players in mobilising the students to overthrow Hasina. This is raising questions about who engineered the Regime Change.
Fortunately for Bangladesh and the Bangladeshis, things can get only better. None of the short-term concerns have materialised. No major collapse of law and order nor oppression of minorities have taken place, barring a few localised incidents. Regarding the long run, things can only get better: it is extremely unlikely that another leader can emerge with reasons to substantiate a “moral right to rule”, disdain political discourse and project a personality cult – the basic ingredients of a dictatorial regime.
Hasina embodied several factors which were intrinsically associated with who she was. It is unlikely that anyone else with a similar background will emerge again. She started as a champion of democracy by seeking to overthrow the military rule that followed the murder of her father, then as a champion of justice by seeking justice for the killing of her father. Over time, however, she became a despot and a vengeful leader. Even if AL manages to regroup and come to power, it will be obliged to have a pluralistic attitude and not identify with Sheikh Mujib alone. All the stalwarts of the party have to be recognised, as only by recognising the forgotten popular figures of the party can it re-emerge.
Regarding the wider geo-political play by bigger powers, it may be important but cannot take away the fact that the majority of people are in favour of the change and are happy about it. It could be similar to gaining independence in 1971. India helped Bangladesh to gain independence because of its own geo-political strategic objective, but it has not reduced the taste of independence. If Bangladeshis’ desire coincides with the objective of others’ then so be it. It is win-win for both.
Eventually, Bangladesh will emerge with robust basic requirements for the protection of the institutions to safeguard democracy, such as independent judiciaries, a functioning parliamentary system with effective opposition parties, vibrant media and civil society organisations. It will become a country that will recognise the collective conscience of the leading citizens and intellectuals and establish good governance and social justice. The economy may go through some fluctuations due to troubles in the financial sector and export market, but a robust agriculture sector, vibrant domestic real estate market and remittances will keep it afloat.
The author is a former UN official who was Chief of Policy Assistance Branch for Asia and the Pacific of the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO).
