On August 5, Sheikh Hasina's departure amidst a student-led uprising triggered an unexpected wave of nationwide unrest in Bangladesh. Celebrations quickly turned into chaos as mobs attacked, burnt, and looted properties of Awami League leaders and those perceived as supporters of the deposed regime.

The violence, marked by disturbing scenes reminiscent of Afghanistan's past conflicts, exposed the deep-seated anger and frustration of the population.

Properties and temples of the minorities were attacked, highlighting the communal undertones of the unrest. The violence also claimed the lives of 40 policemen in a gruesome incident where a police station was set on fire in Sirajganj. Several convicts, including militants, were freed by mobs attacking jails across the country.

In the wake of Hasina's departure, Nobel Laureate Dr. Mohammed Yunus emerged as the choice of the student movement to lead the interim government. Dr. Yunus, widely respected in the West, accepted the responsibility and returned to Bangladesh. Upon his return, he called for an end to the violence and sought to maintain friendly relations with India.

A 17-member Advisory Council, headed by Dr. Yunus, was sworn in. The Council included representatives from the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP), intellectuals, members of the Hefazat-e-Islam, as well as members from the Hindu and Buddhist communities, the Students’ Movement Against Discrimination, and some former bureaucrats and technocrats.

The inclusion of Khalid Hossain, former Naib-i-Amir of Hefazat-e-Islam, raises concerns, due to his fundamentalist views on freedom of expression and women's rights.

There are doubts about Dr. Yunus’s ability to maintain cohesion within the Council, particularly with conservative groups like Jamaat-e-Islami (JeI) and Hefazat-e-Islam, who oppose his ideas on microfinance and women’s empowerment.

While these groups have temporarily accepted his leadership, their ideological differences may eventually create tensions within the Council. Analysts are divided in their interpretations of the violence that followed Hasina’s departure.

Some attribute the chaos to the people’s pent-up anger against the Awami League’s misrule, widespread corruption, suppression of political opposition, and election rigging. Others believe there were some behind-the-scenes moves involving external agencies like Pakistan’s ISI and possibly the CIA, taking advantage of the student-led movement to destabilise the regime.

The near-simultaneous attacks on Awami League leaders and symbols of the Liberation War suggest that forces beyond the student movement were involved. The destruction of the Bangabandhu Museum, the vandalism of freedom fighter memorials, and the burning of the Indira Gandhi Cultural Centre indicate that these were targeted acts, likely perpetrated by conservative Islamist groups opposed to Bangladesh’s liberation, and its ties with India.

Among Bangladesh observers in India, there is a notion, faint yet distinct enough, that tries not only to downplay the plight of the Hindu and other minorities in Bangladesh, but even holds that the “so-called attacks on minorities on the other side of the border” is mostly a fiction created by the rightists.

Our dislike for the Indian Right Wing’s attempt at polarising the nation on religious lines should not make us blind to the ground reality that anyone who has stayed in Bangladesh for some time could easily discern.

The minorities there have got used to the regular day-to-day discrimination and hatred they face and the annual attacks on their properties and temples around Durga Puja time. These, however, increase manifold when there is political turmoil in the country.

The ongoing disturbances are no exception. This is a reality and is not a fiction woven by the RW.

It is reported that steps have been taken to safeguard the minorities and their properties. It is heartening to see members of the majority community taking up the responsibility to protect their fellow citizens belonging to the minority communities. These are positive signs and it is fervently hoped that this camaraderie will continue in the future too.

A notable feature of the Students’ Movement Against Discrimination was the emergence of strong anti-India sentiments among its leaders. Initially focused on job reservation reforms, the movement’s goals shifted to demanding Hasina’s removal following the deaths of nearly 200 protesters. The growing anger was directed at India, perceived as indirectly supporting Hasina’s government.

This hostility led to attacks on Indian symbols in Bangladesh, including the Indira Gandhi Cultural Centre. Despite these events, the student leaders continued to express a desire for friendship with India, while simultaneously accusing India of prioritising its relationship with Hasina over the interests of the Bangladeshi people.

However, these accusations are not supported by facts. India has consistently maintained strong relations with both the Bangladeshi government and its people, providing substantial financial assistance, fostering cultural exchanges, and facilitating educational cooperation.

The resolution of historical disputes, such as the 2015 exchange of enclaves, exemplifies the potential for amicable relations between the two nations.

Some political analysts dismiss the threat posed to India by militant fundamentalist groups operating in Bangladesh, viewing it as exaggerated or as deliberate fear mongering with a communal agenda. However, the reality is quite different.

India’s concern is grounded in harsh truths. Even the limited information available in the public domain is alarming.

Several dangerous religio-political terrorist groups are active in Bangladesh, and the previous Awami League government had banned some of these organisations, much to India's relief. With Sheikh Hasina’s fall, India has valid reasons to worry about the resurgence of militant fundamentalism in Bangladesh.

Incidents of bomb blasts in West Bengal, along with subsequent arrests, have fueled suspicions that some Bangladeshi terror groups are secretly operating within Indian borders. Many of these terrorists were imprisoned in Bangladesh, either as convicts or awaiting trial.

During the recent unrest, mobs attacked jails and forcibly released convicted terrorists, heightening fears of renewed threats across the porous India-Bangladesh border.

The new government is busy reforming and overhauling the system. Expectedly, a drive has begun to “cleanse” the administration and different public institutions.

In simple terms, this means the removal of suspected Awami League sympathisers from positions of power and replacing them with those who would be more amenable to the dictates of the new government.

As for the prospect of holding a fresh election to form a representative government, it appears that the Advisory Council is not in any great hurry for that. Dr Yunus as well as the student members of the Council are on record saying that elections would certainly be held, but the priority was to set the house, i.e. the government, in order.

The political parties, especially the BNP and its allies, on the other hand, would like the polls to be conducted sooner rather than later so that they can capitalise on the prevailing mood of the people. The registration of the JeI, which was cancelled by the Supreme Court in 2013 making it unfit to participate in elections, will no doubt be restored soon enabling it to return to the political arena.

Once elections are held, it is more than likely that the 20-party alliance led by the BNP, and the JeI will sweep the polls. In such an eventuality, given the previous experience of BNP-JeI rule in Bangladesh and the latter’s socio-political outlook, it may not be the best of times for those who believe in freedom of thought and expression, for the free-thinkers, for activists for women and gender equality, among others.

In short, the potential for a shift towards an ultra-conservative government poses a significant risk to the country’s progress.

The Awami League, once the dominant political force in Bangladesh, now faces an uncertain future. Calls for the party’s ban from political opponents and Islamic religious groups have gained momentum. Even if the party is not banned outright, its leaders may face legal actions that could cripple its ability to function effectively.

Rebuilding the party and regaining public trust will be a monumental challenge for the Awami League. The current political climate is heavily skewed against them, and the memory of the Liberation War, which they once championed, is at risk of being erased from the collective consciousness of Bangladesh’s new generation.

The Movement Against Discrimination, initially aimed at reforming job reservation policies, transformed into a revolution that removed Sheikh Hasina from power. However, this upheaval allowed anti-liberation forces and ultra-conservative Islamists to push their agenda of erasing Bangladesh’s inclusive history.

The road ahead is fraught with challenges, but it is crucial for the nation’s enlightened youth to safeguard the democratic values that define Bangladesh. Only then can the country emerge from this turmoil as a truly free and forward-looking democracy.

Sandip Mitra retired from the Indian Foreign Service. Views expressed are the writer’s own.

Latest News

SANDIP MITRA