By the time the former US ambassador to Bangladesh, Peter Haas, concluded his term, the nation was already a powder keg.

Just a few days after his departure, the students and youth of the nation erupted in full-scale revolt against a government that showed no inclination to listen to their demands. This revolt eventually turned into a revolution that would dethrone a political leader who had seemed invincible just a few days earlier.

Ambassador Peter Haas served in Dhaka during one of Bangladesh’s most significant chapters: the 2024 general election. The entire nation witnessed the one-sided affair, the violence, the mass arrests of the opposition, and one of the lowest voter turnouts ever recorded. It’s a shame Haas couldn’t witness the consequences of this disenfranchisement.

The actions and words of the US ambassador carry an enormous amount of weight in a country like ours. Haas was one of the most outspoken advocates of free, fair, and participatory elections in Bangladesh. His term saw an unprecedented number of high-profile diplomatic visits from the US to Bangladesh. Meetings were held, and letters were penned to urge the government to listen to the people’s demands.

Freedom of expression, freedom of the press, and labour rights were some of the key points emphasised. All this pressure came in the context of the recent US sanctions on Bangladesh security forces for human rights violations, a measure that led to tangible positive results. Extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearances by security forces in Bangladesh dwindled to almost nothing for a few months.

As a result of this pro-democratic posturing, people-to-people relations between the US and Bangladesh soared. It is due to this high degree of reverence for the US that the people of Bangladesh remained relatively quiet while the rest of the Muslim world was in uproar about the US’s support for Israel’s actions in Gaza. However, after the elections, all the pro-democratic pressure from the US came to an abrupt halt.

We, as ordinary citizens, may not be savvy about the goings-on in the halls of the State Department, but we can certainly feel it when a policy change is enacted.

There are many interpretations of the sudden silence of the US regarding the plight of the Bangladeshi people. Due to the very prominent role that the US ambassador had been thrust into, he had also become somewhat of a target for the most militant supporters of the ruling party, the Awami League.

There were indeed many open calls for violence against the ambassador. There was also an alarming incident when the ambassador was nearly surrounded by a pro-ruling party group while visiting the family of a victim of enforced disappearance. Such alarming deterioration in the ambassador’s security, extremely hostile rhetoric against the US from the prime minister herself in parliament, as well as Bangladesh’s previous record of attacks against US ambassadors, might have forced the US to turn down the volume on its pro-democracy and pro-human rights messaging.

A more conspiratorial interpretation would suggest India’s active role in forcing the US into a more timid policy vis-à-vis Bangladesh.

Needless to say, India is the US’s key strategic partner in South Asia and one of the four pillars of QUAD. Washington has frequently proclaimed that it supports India’s leading role in the region. It’s also true that the current government of India gave its full support to the Awami League. This unwavering support from India for the Awami League is due to the narrative that the outwardly centre-left political party is a vital bulwark against the rise of fundamentalism and religious extremism in Bangladesh.

The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)-led government of India has expressly placed all its bets on the Awami League government in Bangladesh to stifle religious tensions between the two nations. That is why many are convinced that it was India who asked the US to back away from Bangladesh by arguing for the prioritisation of regional stability over ideological divides.

The other interpretation is a more practical one.

The world is on fire, and the US is preparing for its most important election in recent history. There is simply not enough ideological bandwidth, strategic interest, or diplomatic will in the US to try and influence the internal matters of a country so far away.

Regardless of the true circumstances, it cannot be said that the US did everything in its power to call for democracy in Bangladesh.

The sanction on the former army chief for corruption and undermining democratic institutions could have come before the election, rather than months after. The much-discussed visa restriction policy from the State Department against undemocratic actors remains a mystery as to whether it was ever effective. Moreover, the sudden backtracking of US policy in Bangladesh gave the US’s rivals a clear indication of the limitations of the US in the region.

Of course, hindsight is 20/20.

Despite the shortcomings, the active role of the US and its ambassador in promoting democracy in Bangladesh had several positive effects. Due to the space created by US sanctions and diplomatic pressure, the opposition parties managed to rally in numbers not seen in many years. Such an uprising, and the ruling party’s eventual crackdown, also showed the world the dark side of Bangladesh’s development story. The narrative of Bangladesh as South Asia’s development miracle has been well and truly shattered. This kind of unveiling of the façade of democracy by the ruling party was also a key component that led to the student protests and expedited the fall of Sheikh Hasina.

At the time of writing, it is still unclear whether the regime’s overthrow will truly bring about democracy in Bangladesh. The nation is suffering in every aspect. Too many people have died. There is still a great deal of anger and unresolved hatred. The scars of this revolution will take quite some time to heal, but the marks will never disappear. But the world has its eyes on Bangladesh, waiting to see what kind of nation will rise from the ashes.

Before leaving quietly from a troubled Bangladesh, Peter Haas made a touching post on LinkedIn about how he hadn’t expected his assignment to end this way. Many regarded him as a hero, a champion for democracy in Bangladesh. Others saw him as a foreign actor trying to orchestrate regime change. Whoever replaces him has very big shoes to fill, and it is hard to imagine that people will soon forget the legacy of work the ambassador left behind.●

Zillur Rahman is the executive director of the Centre for Governance Studies (CGS) and a television talk show host in Dhaka. His X handle is @zillur.

Portraits are being smashed. Whose photo will soon adorn walls in government offices? The light now shines fully on the Army Chief. He has some questions to answer.

1. How did the big plunderers get to fly safely to Dubai? I am referring to ex-ministers. One can understand the security rationale for the sisters and avoiding August 1975, but why the cabinet?
2. Why was he insisting that students return home? After 300 dead and thousands injured, why disempower them when they are most needed?
3. Did the several delays to his national announcement suggest a sense of unreadiness and lack of resolve, or something else?
4. Why does he feel the Armed Forces need to remain outside barracks? They don’t seem to have done much to quell violence yesterday or today, nor preemptively protect minorities. Are there not other sufficient security agencies, allied with student people power, to stamp out provocative attacks by desperados of the ancien regime or old-style opposition hard cases?
5. Appointed by the fugitive Prime Minister, what can he do to reassure the people that he is the right person to be at the helm?
6. Who decides the composition of an interim cabinet? How are shortlists created, by what criteria, and by whom?
7. Will all political prisoners be released immediately?
8. Does he or his subordinates have an economic roadmap? Officers these days are educated and trained about statecraft, so which way are they inclined?

Forget about returning to 1990 nor 2007

Since the students died in triple figures, some by army rifles, at the very least, their representatives should be seated at the cabinet table. Why are there rumours of discredited "shushil samaj" personages being lobbied for? Has anyone wondered whether worker leaders should be there too?

There should be no lengthy timetable of promised handovers or an end to the transition, certainly not for two long years. That would mean a 2007 2.0 regime all over again. No one today of influence seems to have a plan for industrialisation, East Asian style. Remember, the original catalyst for the rebellion was a lack of jobs. That must remain central to the discourse. Retreating into the comfort zone of outsourcing economic policy and handing financial sovereignty to the IMF and World Bank is asking for trouble.

Egypt offers a cautionary tale. Tahrir Square thought they were the vanguard, but they didn’t have a plan. They were used and then shunted aside. A dozen years later, it continues as an economic basket case run by a pro-Western general who ‘wins’ elections where 90 per cent of phantom voters plump for him. Or so he says.

This is no longer 1990 when there was time. Repairing civil society and discussing good governance at a relaxed pace is a luxury that a much larger, connected, politicised populace cannot afford. They demand economic emancipation, jobs, affordable basics, and personal security. Now. This means immediately learning lessons from East and Southeast Asia and joining them. I notice next to no debate, curiosity, or awareness about this. How on earth do you think a new export manufacturing sector, matching garments, is supposed to emerge? How will we approach the largest economic power, China?

Oh, and amid a reset with Delhi, does Dhaka immediately demand a reduction in payments to Adani? Along with a forwarding address for the absconding Energy Minister already sipping champagne to drown his sorrows.

If the composition of the interim government includes those from the mid-2000s, with a Western economic and geopolitical orientation, then down the road there will be a greater, immensely destructive earthquake. The people yearn for a genuine democracy, not merely electoralism. If that does not come about, then we will wonder if we get a General Musharraf from Rawalpindi or a General Park from Seoul.

The game has only just started.●

Farid Erkizia Bakht is a writer and analyst.

The coordinators of the student body that led the protest against Sheikh Hasina’s authoritarian rule that ousted her government in Bangladesh on August 5th have declared the formation of an interim government with the country's only Nobel Peace Prize laureate, Professor Muhammad Yunus, as its Chief Advisor.

In a video message published on the profile of Student Against Discrimination’s coordinator Asif Mahmud, Nahid Islam, another coordinator, claimed Professor Yunus has agreed to take charge, “Responding to the appeal of the students and people, Professor Muhammad Yunus has agreed to take on this immense job to save the country.”

They urged Bangladesh’s president to call Professor Yunus to form the interim government. The student leaders said they would announce the names of other members of the government by morning.

Acknowledging the deterioration of law and order, they have requested the president to take necessary steps and promised to support the security forces in carrying out their duties.

Besides, the student group said they would protect the revolution until the interim government was formed, “We will not accept any other government except the government proposed by the students and people. We will not accept any military government, military-backed government or any B-team government formed with the associates of the fascists.”

The organisers of the student protest have been calling the Sheikh Hasina-led Awami League government “a group of fascists”.●

On Sunday, close to 100 people died in Bangladesh, mostly protestors, but the number also includes significant numbers of policemen and governing Awami League members. The government has announced an indefinite curfew and has said that it will come down hard on “terrorists.” The student leaders, however, have announced that everyone who supports them should converge on Dhaka “to mark the ultimate signature of this student citizen uprising” as they want to lay siege on Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina’s residence, which has turned into a military garrison right now. The army has stated it will fulfil its constitutional duty and enforce the curfew, but it will not shoot protestors.

The government’s decision to call on its party activists to assemble on Saturday, at the same time as huge numbers of protestors were on the same streets, was extremely reckless, and it was entirely foreseeable that clashes and deaths (on both sides) would result. The government gains by being able to brand protestors as “terrorists”: the more violence there is, particularly when its side are victims, the better it suits them politically.

The government’s decision to call a curfew on Saturday evening is primarily to try and prevent people from converging on Dhaka. The students are, however, not going to stop their programmes simply because a curfew has been called. Many people who would otherwise have taken part in converging on Dhaka may well be deterred by Sunday’s killings, but enough will take part to make it potentially a huge rally.

The army’s position on how it will enforce the curfew is crucial. It is significant that the army chief has, it appears, agreed not to shoot at “the people” and has messaged that the army is on the “people’s side.”. However, there are lots of internal dynamics that can complicate the situation, with some generals more loyal to Hasina than others. To make it all more complicated, junior officers also have mixed views - so, for example, the generals loyal to Hasina may feel they cannot risk alienating their subordinates. It is notable that a video shared widely showed some army officers today siding with the protestors against the police and Awami League.

All things being equal, it is, more likely that the army will allow the protestors to gather in Dhaka, as long as there is no serious violence.

However, going by Saturday, Awami League activists (and the police) will try to clash with the protestors seeking to congregate in Dhaka, something that could push the protestors’ aims off course. This is where the army will have to make a crucial decision - to side with the protestors or with the Awami League and police.

The international community continues to be silent. There are unconfirmed reports that India has told Hasina that her time is up, or at least that they can do no more to support her. Since India is a key external supporter of the Awami League and the Hasina regime, this would, if true, be significant. (Of course, if things do come to a crunch, India will make sure Hasina and her family are safe).

However, India will be very concerned about what comes after Hasina and may seek to be involved in the process of transition. It is important to note that India also has significant influence over certain parts of the army.

What about the US, EU, UK and the rest of the liberal democratic countries? They have in the past taken their cues from India, and will no doubt continue to be influenced by it. However, the total silence of these countries over recent days is both shameful and extraordinary.

On the one hand, there are all the signs of a popular revolution going on, and on the other hand, a government (which they have supported) willing to create anarchy in the country for the sake of staying in power. You would imagine that this would be the moment for them to finally put pressure on Sheikh Hasina to resign and take the appropriate steps to allow a peaceful move (with the likely assistance of the army) to a transitional government.

Perhaps something is happening in the background, but reports suggest that there is no unanimity amongst the international community on what to do. In addition, some embassies are said to have concerns about the safety of their own staff. Together, it appears right now that these countries are paralysed.

Not helping with this, of course, is the fact that the United States has no ambassador in position. Haas, the former ambassador who left the country just a few weeks ago, was a significant critic of the Awami League, and had he been in Dhaka now, the international response could well have been different.

How does one make the transition from an Awami League government to some kind of interim government? It is not straightforward, particularly if you want to avoid the impression of an army coup. In 2007, when the army did take over (and set up an interim government) there was no political government in place, only a caretaker one. It was therefore easy for the army to get the President to proclaim a state of emergency. Now, however, there is a prime minister, a Cabinet and a parliament in place - none of whom want to leave power.

This means that Sheikh Hasina has to agree to resign and also make the relevant moves to allow an interim government to take over. She clearly does not want to do anything of the sort at the moment - nor see a need to. It therefore appears that the protests have to reach a level where she has no option but to resign – or at least she realises it is in her own best interests to do so.

The army’s role in the transition will be important - to ensure law and order in the country and a move back to stability.

The next few days are likely to be decisive. One can only hope that Hasina and the Awami League do not want to go down fighting, resulting in an even higher toll of deaths and that she will agree sooner rather than later that she has to quit.

David Bergman is a UK-based journalist and can be followed on X at @TheDavidBergman

Bangladesh police scaled back their deployment on the streets of Dhaka on Saturday as student protesters gathered at the historic Shahid Minar to call for the government’s resignation, according to a police official and sources on the ground.

This decision to reduce police presence on such a decisive day of the protest can be interpreted in two ways: either the police have decided to withdraw their support of the government or the government is assessing how the protest unfolds without their intervention.

“Our force was deployed first with the instruction that the deployment must be defensive,” a police intelligence official told Netra News. “But after seeing the massive gathering today, the police deactivated itself.”

Bangladesh’s student protests have escalated into a mainstream anti-government movement, posing an existential threat to Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina’s administration.

Beginning in mid-July, a brutal crackdown on protesters resulted in over 200 deaths — a pogrom in which the police have played a pivotal role, responsible for more fatalities than any other agency. Consequently, protesters have directed much of their anger towards the police. At least four police personnel were among the deaths.

Throughout Hasina’s 15-year tenure, the police have become her instrumental shield. Any indication that they are unable or unwilling to continue defending her government will deal a significant blow to her grip on power.

A journalist, citing sources within the Dhaka Metropolitan Police, reported that the police are now focused on consolidating their smaller outposts with larger stations.

Some officials have paused their official duties, working from home, while many police resources are now preserved to protect stations and other key installations that have drawn the ire of the protesters.

“The situation is such that it will not even be surprising if the police decide to join the protests tomorrow,” he said.

At least two people, including a policeman, were killed and hundreds injured in Bangladesh on August 3rd, 2024, as security forces opened fire during sustained civil unrest that has menaced the government of Sheikh Hasina.

The fresh violence resumed after a week-long hiatus following the most intense agitation in Bangladesh’s history, which resulted in more than 200 deaths in the span of days. On Friday, clashes were reported in Dhaka, Habiganj, Gazipur, Sylhet, Khulna, and Lakshmipur, where police and ruling party cadres were seen attacking protesters with firearms and machetes.

The renewed and defiant protests in Bangladesh, which first began in opposition to quotas in public jobs and have now mushroomed into widespread civil unrest, pose an existential threat to Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina’s otherwise tight grip on power.

As tensions intensified, with people from many walks of life joining the protests, Bangladeshi authorities responded by shutting down or downgrading mobile internet in certain hotspots. The internet had been repeatedly blocked during the earlier phase of the crackdown. Facebook, the social media site popular in Bangladesh, was once again reported shut on mobile internet before being restored. 

Student leaders have so far fallen short of demanding an outright resignation from Hasina but have asked for the resignation of several top ministers accused of inciting attacks on protesters at the onset, and the prosecution of officials accused of killing protesters. The government, too, has avoided directly attacking the students and blamed the opposition for the violence, but it has continued detaining students from around the country.

On Friday, the student leaders vowed to continue as they announced a nationwide “non-cooperation” movement, a type of civil disobedience that asks citizens to suspend transactions with the government.

International actors have also dialled up pressure on Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina. On Friday, a group of 22 influential American lawmakers, led by Senator Edward Markey, called for “a representative democratic government” in Bangladesh in a letter addressed to Secretary of State Antony Blinken. The European Union had earlier postponed talks on a new pact with Bangladesh, citing the government’s crackdown on protesters.

Prime Minister Hasina’s past three elections have been widely discredited due to allegations of voter fraud and boycotts by opposition parties. She has faced significant criticism for becoming increasingly authoritarian during her more than 15 years in power, frequently resorting to extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearances, often targeting opposition members.

During Friday’s protests, a garment worker died in northeastern Habiganj when members of the Chhatra League, affiliated with the ruling party, clashed with protesters. Mostak Mia, 24, died from bullet injuries, according to Prothom Alo. Meanwhile, in Khulna, a police constable was allegedly beaten to death by an angry crowd protesting against a police station after police attempted to chase them in an armoured vehicle. Around 50 people were injured, including 17 who were hospitalised.

Netra News obtained firsthand videos from four eyewitnesses that captured police firing at protesters in Dhaka’s upscale Uttara neighbourhood. Eyewitnesses reported members of the ruling Awami League party and its affiliates shooting at students gathered in Sector 11 in Uttara, despite the possession of firearms being illegal in Bangladesh. Some ruling party activists also carried machetes, rods, and sticks.

In Lakshmipur, Awami League cadres were seen parading the streets with long knives, machetes, and what appeared to be firearms. The Daily Prothom Alo newspaper identified one of the attackers as Mohammad Russell, the chauffeur of AKM Salauddin Tipu, a ruling party leader and chairman of the local council.

Near the campus of Shahjalal University of Science and Technology in Sylhet, a special police unit trained by the United States was seen shooting at students, according to firsthand footage obtained and verified by Netra News. Clashes broke out in other parts of the city as well, with a 12-year-old child among at least 50 others injured in the violence, according to demonstrators and police sources.

The United Nations children’s agency, UNICEF, reported on Friday that as many as 32 children were confirmed killed during a brutal crackdown by security forces to quell student protests that began on July 16. 

“UNICEF has now confirmed that at least 32 children were killed during July’s protests, with many more injured and detained. This is a terrible loss,” said Sanjay Wijesekera, the organisation’s South Asia regional director, in a statement. 

The statement added that many more children were being detained by authorities and called for an end to child detention.

Amnesty International in a statement on Friday condemned what it called “arbitrary detention” of more than 10,000 people arrested by authorities.

Today, hundreds of thousands of people in Bangladesh took part in large-scale protests throughout the country, with many slogans calling directly for Sheikh Hasina to resign. Three popular slogans were: “Why my brother/sister is dead. Hasina must answer for this.”, “1,2,3,4 “Sheikh Hasina is a dictator,” “1, 2, 3, 4. Hasina, step down right now,” and “One demand, one condition: resignation, resignation.”

What does this all mean?

The protests are unlikely to stop. They are triggered by a deep, understandable emotional response in the country to the killing by the government’s law enforcement authorities of at least 200 people, most of whom were students and ordinary citizens.

The killings have scarred the nation. There is huge anger. The government’s response has been unbelievably crude—blaming the opposition, calling them “terrorists,” and not taking any responsibility. People have had enough of the government’s lies. They don’t believe the governing Awami League party anymore, partly because they have seen what has happened in front of their eyes or in videos that literally show security forces shooting at and killing innocent protesting students and others in cold blood.

Many people who used to support the party and spoke poorly about the political opposition now strongly feel that the Awami League has no moral right to remain in power.

In the past, the Awami League government’s narratives against the opposition parties hit home and were often accepted by large sections of civil society. The government has effective control of television, and there are only a few independent newspapers, which helps it control the narrative. But the situation is different now. It feels like the Awami League has “lost the room” in the sense that it has lost the country. It does not matter what the government says anymore, as other than their own party loyalists, no one believes it.

In this situation, can the government maintain its hold on power?

It could, of course, do an about-turn.

It could agree to a United Nations investigation, accept its own responsibility for the killings, and beg forgiveness from the country. But this would represent such a huge U-turn for the government that it is very difficult to see the prime minister—who has repeatedly blamed the deaths and violence on the opposition (referring to them as “terrorists”)—taking such a step. Things have got so bad for the government that completely changing tack now would not likely regain sufficient popular support. People simply think that a government that has killed so many people has no moral right to remain in power. It is as simple as that.

Clearly, if Bangladesh were like Iran or other similarly highly repressive countries, the government could use increased repression to control the population and end the protests. But Bangladesh is not Iran—and whilst the law enforcement authorities have been very loyal to the Awami League, they are unlikely to be willing to take part in the levels and length of repression necessary to calm the political situation.

The government could seek to bring the army back into the equation, but to do so would be politically risky and, unless this is a permanent state, will only succeed until the army returns to barracks, when the protests would simply resume.

The Bangladesh government is now looking towards India, the Awami League’s principal benefactor. The Indian government will no doubt offer to do many things to help the Awami League and is no doubt doing them now. However, in the end, in the context of these huge protests, India can only provide limited support for the Awami League—and also does not want to be seen to be on the wrong side if the Awami League’s government were to fail. India will be pragmatic. India will provide as much political support as it can until it realises that doing so would not be in its interest.

The liberal democratic international community (which I will describe as “the West”) now has an important role to play. It has to try and persuade the Awami League that it is in their best interests now to resign and allow some form of peaceful transfer of power to an army-backed government, as a prelude to free and fair elections in the near future. Ideally, the army would not be involved, but to avoid a bloodbath, there is probably no way a transition to another government could take place without them. The country’s army is the only institution that can play that “independent” role.

The prime minister, though, is not going to listen to the West. The only way that Sheikh Hasina will even think about taking such a drastic step is if India pushes her in this direction. So, the liberal democratic international community must pressure India.

However, right now, there is no reason to think that “the West” is thinking like this at all. Although the EU has issued a strongly worded statement, no other country has. Instead, they have condemned violence in a general manner rather than the law enforcement killings in particular and urged the government to comply with human rights norms.

This mealy-mouthed posture is not new; it reflects how the West has dealt with the Awami League’s move to authoritarianism over the last ten to fifteen years. Since coming to power fairly in 2009, it has avoided free and fair elections three times since then (either through rigging the polls or failing to take the necessary steps that allowed the political opposition to take part). Yet, the West has supported Sheikh Hasina and the Awami League, seeing the party, despite its autocracy and history of terrible human rights violations, as providing the country with stability and economic development.

However, the costs of the West’s acquiescence are now coming home to roost. The people of the country are finally asserting themselves. If the West is concerned about “stability” in Bangladesh—if it wants to avoid the risks of widespread violence—it should now support the Awami League handing over power.

Right now, the only question seems to be how long the Awami League will remain in power. There is a kind of popular revolution taking place in the country. The people are saying to Sheikh Hasina that she should read the writing on the wall, both metaphorically and literally. It says: Resign.●

David Bergman is a UK-based journalist and can be followed on X at @TheDavidBergman

Student-led movements have a long and illustrious pedigree in Bangladesh and greater South Asia. It was a student-led movement in 1952 that secured the right for East Pakistan’s Bengali majority to use their mother tongue as an official language. It was a student-led movement in 1969 that brought Ayub Khan’s autocratic government to its knees and prepared the grounds for the 1971 Liberation War. Historically, along with the working class, students have always been at the vanguard of any progressive struggle not only in South Asia but across the world.

Whereas the Awami League, which rules Bangladesh today, aligned itself with students both in 1952 and 1971, it today finds itself on a collision course with a new generation of student activists. Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, Bangladesh’s independence leader who led the Awami League at the time, once seemed hesitant to accede to the demand of university students to declare independence, which would have meant abandoning his hope of becoming the prime minister of Pakistan. 

Before bowing down to mounting public pressure, his daughter, Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, too, was equally reluctant to reform the quota system lest it herald a loosening of the tight grip she and her party have on power. Or maybe it was pure hubris. Students were once the tailwind that billowed the Awami League’s sails. Today, they are the raging monsoon tempest rocking its boat.

Until recently, the quota system reserved 30% of highly coveted government jobs for the descendants of 1971 freedom fighters. Hasina long claimed it as just, for it gives due regard to the sacrifices the veterans made to help Bangladesh achieve independence.

But we will be deemed purblind if we fail to recognise the authoritarian premise upon which her argument rests. If succinctly described, it amounts to as follows: Because of the role her father played in leading the independence movement and the tragic circumstances under which her father and most of her family members were assassinated in 1975, Sheikh Hasina has an exclusive right to rule Bangladesh — a special quota, if you will — no matter the consequences for the country’s democratic future.

It was thus a grotesque sense of entitlement and a warped sense of victimhood that led Hasina to equate the student protesters with the descendants of the Razakars, a now-pejorative way to describe wartime enemy collaborators. 

Hasina has a long track record of employing denigrating rhetoric against her opponents, hesitating little in revealing the violent fantasies she harbours about her enemies. She once infamously expressed her desire to throw her arch-rival, Khaleda Zia, off the newly built Padma Bridge. But her use of the term Razakar proved to be a denigration too far. It was the last straw that broke the camel’s back.

Her remark also betrays an often invisible but abidingly present caste hierarchy established immediately after the independence war based on descent, with Hasina, her extended family, and Awami League-certified descendants of freedom fighters occupying its very top ranks.

The Kshatriyas who follow this Brahmin clique are such henchmen as the Chhatra League and myriad other Awami League offshoots. Vested with the responsibility of maintaining the status quo with brute force, they are just pure enough to swoop up whatever government jobs that couldn’t be filled up by their paymasters.

Even if they often serve as technocratic ministers and members of the parliament, the business elite of Bangladesh, the Vaishyas, keep their children away from joining the state bureaucracy. Their entitled progeny are instead sent abroad to receive a quality education and lead a prosperous life by spending a tiny fraction of the wealth their parents have hoarded by avoiding paying taxes and by denying their employees a livable wage — all possible thanks to their collusion with whichever political party is in power.

Toiling under these three dominant castes is the rest of the people — the Sudras and the untouchables. Each is a mere cog in the economic machine, but together, they keep Bangladesh afloat. It is thanks to their blood and sweat that Bangladesh’s GDP rises every year. It is due to their precarious existence that Bangladesh’s position remains stagnant on the Human Development Index. And now they have had enough.

Today, it is once again proven that an authoritarian regime is at its weakest point the moment it considers itself invincible. Out of touch with the lived experiences of ordinary Bangladeshis, the Awami League has misread the brewing public discontent over rising inequality, a flagging economy, out-of-control inflation, and a lack of employment opportunities.

And when all the streams of discontent found their confluence in the quota movement, the resulting tide washed away every impression of invincibility that steadily accumulated around the Awami League over the last fifteen years.

The question remains, what now? To answer this question, first, we must recognise the ‘social contract’ between the people of Bangladesh and the ruling party, where citizens transfer the right to govern themselves to a person or assembly of persons — the Sovereign — in exchange for peace and security, is permanently broken.

By unleashing the tide of brutal violence against unarmed protesters, the Awami League government has proved once again that it can offer us neither peace nor security. By waging war against its people, the current government has reverted to a state of war where tyranny reigns supreme. As citizens, it has thus become incumbent upon us to resist. The students have shown the way. Now, it is our turn to follow suit.●

Siddhartha Dhar is a Bangladeshi writer.

Growing up in 1990s Dhaka meant there were two things I took for granted politically. The first was that democracy had become firmly entrenched in Bangladesh and autocracy had been banished by the brave generations who came before us. The second was that globalisation was an excellent opportunity to share Bangladesh’s greatness by moving to the West for higher education before either returning home as a technocrat or making a name for myself abroad.

Our predecessors were the generations who dreamed of and fought for a better future. Ours was the generation that had to live up to that promise by following the path that had been so neatly mapped out by our betters. The Yellow Brick Road stretched out before me to the glories of the Emerald City and the bounties of Oz.

It was a powerful mythology that was reinforced at every turn. 

Learning about the histories of sacrifice from 1952 and 1971 in the classroom, and listening to stories of the decades of military dictatorship that followed, made it impossible to view the circumstances of my own childhood as anything but perfect. 

The movements that brought about this perfection, however, were never framed as grassroots revolutions against tyranny but as the strategic manoeuvres of a handful of political geniuses who now took on the burden of leadership.

The lesson was abundantly clear: trust the system and the benevolent leaders who uphold it, for that is the route to prosperity and happiness. Oz the Great and Powerful, but in saris, not top hats. 

For most of my childhood, this great lie survived all attempts at being dismantled. Any evidence to the contrary was an inconvenient anomaly. The steady growth of Islamism was a pragmatic sacrifice for the greater good and a step towards inclusive reconciliation. 

The lack of sustainable development and the stagnation of growth for the wider population were natural growing pains for a country that was still very young. The occasional upheaval of hartals and oborods was evidence that protest was still a protected right, no matter who led the disruptions. Meanwhile, the personality cults at the heart of our political system were never seen as anything other than overdue reverence to our saviours, who gifted us with their insight and integrity.

The 2006-2008 political crisis was the first sustained challenge to my comfortable apathy for national politics. The subsequent general election brought a brief reprieve, especially when I moved to India in 2008, but I had taken my first peek behind the curtain. In 2010, I moved to the UK for undergraduate studies and became a full-time member of the global diaspora (having not moved back to the country since then apart from short visits), and I kept pulling the curtain back.

Nationalist mythologies might be a powerful relaxant but nothing can wake someone up faster than disillusionment. Moving abroad made me quickly realise how the idea of Bangladesh was a flashy parlour trick used to distract from the ugly reality of exploitative and oppressive politics. The promise of democracy had never really been fulfilled, even as citizens at home and abroad kept being fed its hollow fruits. 

We kept being told that our land was the greenest and our leaders were the best, but there was never any proof. If anything, the constant discrimination aimed at diaspora communities from the Global South, and my personal experiences of prejudice from fellow Bangladeshis upon realising my queer identity only heightened my discomfort.

For me, what irreversibly broke the spell was how any calls for improving the lives of people came up against the same response – denial and dismissal of the issue and a pivot towards blaming someone else (usually the Opposition). 

Shahbag and its calls for historic accountability? Hooligans hijacking and ruining a movement for closure. Demanding justice for the many victims of Islamist violence in 2015 and 2016? Atheists and deviants who rocked the boat too much. The 2018 calls for road safety? Unruly children who should be grateful for their lot in life. The ongoing calls for reforming an unsustainable quota system? Traitors to the very fabric of our nation.

The Wizard of Oz was growing displeased and the hordes of flying monkeys were being let loose with greater frequency to wreak havoc. It took me – and many of my peers – far too long to realise that this was not normal. I am glad to know that the sheen of the Emerald City has worn off. 

Yet, that knowledge in and of itself is not enough. No matter how much their sacrifices have been warped, the people who came before us did fight for a future that is based on compassion, equity, and justice. Many are continuing that fight today. For those of us who have left, regardless of the reason, there is a legacy that we need to build on.

There are many ways to mobilise – sharing verifiable information, challenging misinformation on all platforms, putting pressure on global powers to speak up, having overdue conversations with complacent loved ones, organising solidarity campaigns, and so much more. 

It does not matter how we get to our final destination, but it does matter that we make a collective push for it. The Wizard’s illusion has been broken, but the land of Oz is not yet free. We can help change that.●

Ibtisam Ahmed is a UK-based researcher on Bangladesh’s aid sector.

Students in Bangladesh started protesting for public jobs to be allocated based on merit — as opposed to quotas, especially those reserved for descendants of war veterans — first in 2008, and then again in 2013 and 2018. The quota system was dismantled in 2018 but reinstated by a High Court judgement in June 2024, instigating the current wave of protests.

Student uprisings have played a key role in Bangladesh’s history, with figures such as Rafique, Salam, Barkat, Jabbar, and Shafiur celebrated as rebel heroes, who died facing police fire on 21st February 1952 while demanding recognition of Bangla as an official language of the then-Pakistan.

In the current quota reform protests, images of students such as Abu Sayed, who stood fearless with arms outstretched before being shot by the police, are going viral on social media. These images illuminate rebellion against oppressive power as a form of radical politics instigating social change.

By studying the recent student protests in Bangladesh as a powerful instrument of South Asia’s political imagination, we can understand how the dynamics between power and rebellion create new heroes and influence social transformation. 

The act of rebellion goes beyond refusing to stay silent in the face of rights violations; rebels take a stand above all else, proclaiming it preferable to the status quo, even to life itself. The cause for rebellion then becomes a ‘supreme good,’ a refusal to compromise, a zero-sum game: it’s all or nothing.

Thus, Abu Sayed’s figure looms large in public consciousness as a rebel who sacrifices his life to the cause of ‘good’. As a last resort, he accepts death itself rather than being denied the rights that represent true freedom for many students like himself — believing it is ‘better to die on one’s feet than to live on one’s knees.’ (Camus, 1951).

Student protesters hold powerful cultural and social positions in Bangladesh and can assume a heroic role that has the potential to mobilise political transformation. Versions of Abu Sayed’s image, standing with arms outstretched when he was shot, are going viral on social media and news outlets. These include a sketch of his heroic stand by Kausik Sarker, an image of him in front of Bangladesh’s flag denoting his sacrifice for the country, and the same image accompanied by lines from Bangladesh’s national poet Kazi Nazrul Islam’s poem “The Rebel.”

Much like the image of Martin Luther King delivering the “I Have a Dream” speech or the raised fist for the Black Lives Matter movement, Abu Sayed’s image has come to symbolise an empowered rebel standing against authority. He symbolically represents the marginalised class within a capitalist power structure run by upper-class elites.

Female students, too, have taken a central role in the movement. 

The images of young women in Bangladesh’s protests have shifted from photographs of a blood-drenched, beaten, and injured young woman to crowds of female students marching and chanting slogans.

Schoolgirls were seen chanting for quota reform, and some women use innovative tactics like mixing chilli powder with water to spray on those who attack them during protests.

These scenes are reminiscent of the protests of Iranian women against the Islamic Revolution and the recent Citizenship Law protests in India, where women were at the frontlines fighting for Muslims in India.

But these protests are less an iconography of female empowerment and more a shameful reminder of the failure of those perceived as more powerful than these young women, demonstrating that they are capable of fighting for their rights despite the violence against them.

With rebellion, awareness is born. 

The heroic iconography of Abu Sayed and the image of Tonnii Akhter, a young woman drenched in blood, has proved influential in mobilising young people’s political power in Bangladesh. These images reaffirm that being a rebel is a precondition for survival or living a life worth living for these young people.

They are so powerful that even the diaspora jumped into action. Bangladeshi communities abroad have been carrying out peaceful demonstrations, discussions, teach-ins, and petitions in solidarity with Bangladeshi students in various parts of the world. 

It is the student rebels’ anger that has the power to start a tsunami against injustice, and when the water rages, the landscape must change.●

Dr. Nazia Hussein is a senior lecturer at the School of Sociology, Politics, and International Studies at the University of Bristol, UK.

মাত্র অল্প কয়েকটা দিন পরিবারের সঙ্গে যোগাযোগ করতে না পেরে আমরা প্রবাসীরা উদ্বেগ- উৎকণ্ঠায় ছিলাম। অথচ বাংলাদেশে অন্তত ২০৯টি পরিবার আর কখনও তাদের প্রিয়জনকে ছুঁয়েও দেখতে পারবে না। অনেক পরিবার এখনও হয়তো জানেই না যে তাদের স্বজনের লাশ কোথায় পড়ে আছে — আদৌ দাফন হয়েছে কিনা।

আন্দোলনকারী নিরীহ ছেলেগুলিকে একের পর এক গুলি করা হচ্ছে। তাদের শরীর নিথর হয়ে মাটিতে পড়ে আছে। কোনো বন্ধু তখনও চেষ্টা করছে তাকে টেনে এক পাশে নিয়ে যেতে। কিন্তু গুলি থামছেই না। এই দৃশ্য আমাদের পরিচিত: হয়তো কোনো সিনেমায় বা নেটফ্লিক্স সিরিজে দেখেছি। কিন্তু এই দৃশ্য বাস্তবে রূপ নেবে — ঢাকার রাস্তায়, স্বাধীনতার ৫৩ বছর পর, তা আমরা বিশ্বাস করতে চাই না। মনে মনে বার বার আশা করেছি, কোনো ফ্যাক্টচেকার এসে বলুক যে এসব ভুয়া ভিডিও। কোনো নির্ভরযোগ্য মিডিয়া বলুক এগুলো গুজব। কিন্তু যখন এই নিবন্ধ লিখছি, তখন ২০৯ জন নিহত, কয়েক হাজার আহত। চলছে ব্যাপক ধরপাকড়।

জার্মানির বার্লিন শহরে বসে এসব দেখছি। এখন এখানে গ্রীষ্মকাল। তাপমাত্রা ২৬ ডিগ্রি সেলসিয়াস; সূর্য ঝলমল করছে। সবাই সারা বছর এই সময়ের জন্য অপেক্ষা করে। চারিদিকে কিছু না কিছু ঘটেই চলছে। কিছুক্ষণ আগে এক বন্ধু ফোন করে জানতে চাইলো প্রাইডে কখন কোথায় দেখা করবো। আর বার্লিন থেকে ঠিক সাত হাজার কিলোমিটার দূরে, যেখানে আমার জন্ম, আমার বেড়ে ওঠা, সেখানে মৃত্যুর সংখ্যা বাড়ছে। গণতন্ত্রের মৌলিক অধিকার চর্চা করতে গিয়ে, শান্তিপূর্ণ আন্দোলনে, কোটা সংস্কারের ন্যায়সঙ্গত দাবিতে প্রাণ হারাচ্ছে মানুষ।

কিন্তু বার্লিনের এই উল্লাস, এই স্বাধীনতা কেন আমাকে অনুশোচনা দিচ্ছে?

প্রবাসী কল্যাণ ও বৈদেশিক কর্মসংস্থান মন্ত্রণালয়ের হিসাবে সারা বিশ্বে প্রায় ৮০ লাখ বাংলাদেশি প্রবাসী বসবাস করছে। আমাদের সবারই কি এমন অনুভূতি হচ্ছে? হয়তো সবার না। গণতান্ত্রিক দেশে বসবাস করছি, সামাজিক নিরাপত্তা পাচ্ছি, যে কোনো অন্যায় বা অপরাধের বিরুদ্ধে প্রশাসনের সক্রিয় সহায়তা পাচ্ছি। এই বিশেষাধিকার কি এই মুহূর্তে আমাদের পীড়ন দিচ্ছে না? কিন্তু পীড়ন হোক আর দায়বদ্ধতা হোক — আমরা প্রবাসীরা ঠিক এই মুহূর্তে আমাদের বিশেষাধিকার ব্যবহার করেও এই আন্দোলনের পাশে দাঁড়াতে পারি।

২০২২ এর সেপ্টেম্বরের কথা মনে আছে? ইরানে জিনা মাহসা আমিনী নামের এক তরুণীকে ঠিকভাবে হিজাব না পরার অভিযোগে গ্রেপ্তার করা হয়। পরবর্তিতে তার মৃত্যুকে কেন্দ্র করে দেশব্যাপী বিক্ষোভ শুরু হয়। ইরানে এক অভ্যুথানের জন্ম নেয়। ফলশ্রুতিতে দেশটিতে প্রায়ই বন্ধ করে রাখা হয় ইন্টারনেট। তা সত্ত্বেও ইরানি প্রবাসীরা এই আন্দোলনকে এগিয়ে নিয়ে গেছে। সরকারকে আন্তর্জাতিক চাপের মধ্যে রেখেছে।

আধুনিক যুগে একনায়কতান্ত্রিক সরকারের একটি প্রধান হাতিয়ার হচ্ছে ইন্টারনেট ব্ল্যাকআউট। বাংলাদেশে আবারও ইন্টারনেট বন্ধের মতো ঘটনা ঘটবে। কিন্তু আজ যদি ৮০ লাখ প্রবাসীর মধ্যে ২০ লাখও ঐক্যবদ্ধ হতে পারে এবং এই আন্দোলনের প্রতি সমর্থন জানাতে পারে, তা হবে বাংলাদেশের স্বৈরাচারের বিরুদ্ধে একটি শক্তিশালী হাতিয়ার।

এই সময়ে বারবার মনে পড়ছে শাহবাগের দিনগুলোর কথা। আমরা সত্যিই বিশ্বাস করেছিলাম যে বাংলাদেশের পরিবর্তন আসবে। কিন্তু আমাদের সেই স্বপ্নগুলো ধীরে ধীরে ঝরে পড়লো। গত ১২ বছরে তরুণ প্রজন্ম যখনই প্রতিবাদ করেছে, আওয়ামী লীগ প্রথমে নিজেদের স্বার্থে ব্যবহার করার চেষ্টা করেছে। না পারলে সেই আন্দোলন দমন করেছে। আর ঢাল হিসেবে সরকার বারবার সেই পুরানো বয়ান বিক্রি করে আসছে: আওয়ামী লীগের কোনো গণতান্ত্রিক কিংবা ধর্মনিরপেক্ষ বিকল্প নেই। কিন্তু আজকের কোটা আন্দোলন সেই ঢালে ফুটো তৈরি করে দিয়েছে। এই আন্দোলন আর কোটার মধ্যে সীমাবদ্ধ নেই; এখন বিক্ষোভকারীদের দাবি একটি গণতান্ত্রিক বাংলাদেশের।

এই প্রজন্ম রাজনৈতিকভাবে সচেতন; তারা এই সরকার ছাড়া আর কোনো সরকার দেখেনি। তারা ক্লান্ত, হতাশ ও সহযোদ্ধা হারিয়ে দিশেহারা। এই প্রজন্মকে পুরানো কৌশলে দমন করা যাবে না। তাদের দাবি স্পষ্ট: সত্যিকারের গণতন্ত্র ও ন্যায্যতা। সেনা নামিয়ে, ইন্টারনেট বন্ধ করে, হাজার হাজার লোকের বিরুদ্ধে মামলা দিয়ে এবার আর কাজ হবে না।

সেই ছোটবেলায় শেখ হাসিনাকে টিভিতে দেখলেই শিহরিত হতাম, আর এখনো হই। কিন্তু এই শিহরনের মধ্যে তফাত আছে; তখন সেটা ছিল সম্মান, আর এখন ভীতির। তার পরিবারের সঙ্গে যা হয়েছে, নির্বাসন থেকে ফিরে এসে তার রাজনৈতিক লড়াই—এবং তিনি একজন নারী। বাংলাদেশের ইতিহাসে সবচেয়ে দীর্ঘসময় ক্ষমতায় থাকা ব্যাক্তিটি একজন নারী — একজন নারীবাদী হিসেবে এটি আমার জন্য গর্বের বিষয় হওয়ার কথা ছিল। কিন্তু এ যেন লজ্জার। কারণ স্বৈরাচার হওয়ার জন্য কোনো নির্দিষ্ট লিঙ্গের প্রয়োজন হয় না।

আমরা কি তবে এই ক্ষমতার নির্মম পরিণতির দেখতে যাচ্ছি?

ক্ষমতা শব্দটির সঙ্গে ব্যক্তিগতভাবে আমার এক অন্যরকম সম্পর্ক রয়েছে। নিম্ন মধ্যবিত্ত পরিবারে বাবাকে ছাড়া একলা মায়ের সঙ্গে বেড়ে ওঠার কারণে ক্ষমতাহীন অসহায় জীবনের সংগ্রাম আমি পরতে পরতে বুঝতে পারি।

তাই ছোটবেলা থেকেই ক্ষমতাবানদের পর্যবেক্ষণ করতে পারার প্রবণতা ছিল আমার। বিখ্যাত জার্মান সাংবাদিক বেটিনা গাউস লিখেছিলেন, “Je weniger Macht jemand hat, desto mehr weiß sie oder er über die Mächtigen.” যার হাতে যত কম ক্ষমতা থাকে, ক্ষমতাশালীদের সম্পর্কে সে তত বেশি জানে। বাংলাদেশের মধ্যবিত্ত ও নিম্ন আয়ের মানুষরাই ক্ষমতাশালীদের সম্পর্কে সবচেয়ে বেশি জানে। দুর্নীতিগ্রস্ত দেশে উচ্চবিত্তদের কিছুই যায় আসে না। তাই এই আন্দোলনে উচ্চবিত্ত পরিবারের সন্তানদের সংখ্যা হয়তো কম।

বাংলাদেশে ইন্টারনেট ব্ল্যাকআউটের মধ্যে ইতোমধ্যে দলমত নির্বিশেষে প্রবাসীরা সংগঠিত হয়ে কাজ করে যাচ্ছে। বিদেশে আন্দোলন সংগঠিত করা ও আন্তর্জাতিক গণমাধ্যমকে অবহিত করার চেষ্টা চলছে।

আন্তর্জাতিক সংবাদমাধ্যমগুলোর দৃষ্টিতে বাংলাদেশ বিশেষ কোনো গুরুত্ব বহন করে না। তৈরি পোশাক ও জলবায়ু পরিবর্তন ছাড়া বাংলাদেশ-সংশ্লিষ্ট কোনো বিষয় তাদের জন্য গুরুত্বপূর্ণ নয়। কিন্তু তা সত্ত্বেও নিউ ইয়র্ক টাইমস থেকে শুরু করে ইউরোপের বিভিন্ন দেশের বিভিন্ন ভাষার পত্রপত্রিকায় বাংলাদেশের এই আন্দোলন নিয়ে গুরুত্বের সঙ্গে সংবাদ প্রকাশিত হচ্ছে।

জার্মানির এক প্রথম সারির দৈনিক পত্রিকা টাগেসস্পিগেলের ছাপা সংস্করণের শিরোনাম হয়েছে, “বাংলাদেশে প্রাণঘাতী নীরবতা।” নিউ ইয়র্ক টাইমস লিখেছে, “একজন অনমনীয় নেতার দমন-পীড়নে বাংলাদেশে বিপর্যয় নেমে এসেছে।” যেসব পত্রিকা বাংলাদেশ নিয়ে কোনোদিন লেখেওনি, তাদেরও শিরোনাম হচ্ছে বাংলাদেশের আন্দোলন।

বার্লিনের স্বাধীনতা আজকাল নিজেকে ভীষণ পীড়ন দিচ্ছে। সেজন্য মাঝে মাঝে কি নিজেকে স্বার্থপর মনে হয়? হ্যাঁ, মনে হয় — তাই হয়তো প্রবাস থেকে কিছু করার চেষ্টা করি। কিন্তু এই কিছু করার চেষ্টাটা কি নিজের মনকে সান্ত্বনা দেবার জন্য? নিজে ভালো থাকার জন্য? যদি তাইও হয়, এই মুহুর্তে প্রবাসীদের চেষ্টাই হয়ে উঠতে পারে বিদ্রোহের এক শক্তিশালী অংশ। ●

শাম্মী হক জার্মান সংবাদ মাধ্যমে কর্মরত একজন বাংলাদেশী সাংবাদিক।

On June 5th 2024, Bangladesh’s student community took to the streets to protest the reinstatement of the discriminatory quota-based recruitment system for government jobs in Bangladesh. However, the government went on to politicise the movement, labelling the protesters as anti-state traitors before considering their demands.

Protesters soon began receiving threats from cabinet ministers and ruling party leaders. As a consequence of their incitement, on July 15th, the Chhatra League and Jubo League carried out a brutal attack on students at Dhaka University. Female students, pedestrians, and even injured students in hospital were not spared from the attack.

Following this, a joint operation by the police, BGB, RAB, and the army—accompanied by a nationwide digital crackdown blocking the internet—led to a massacre in Bangladesh.

Heavy weaponry such as AK-47s and SKS snipers were used against innocent and unarmed civilians, a blatant violation of human rights and crimes against humanity.

Pedestrians, women, and children in their homes lost their lives alongside the protesters due to indiscriminate firing from RAB helicopters on direct orders from the government. An atmosphere of fear was imposed on the people through enforced disappearances, murders, and mass arrests. Thousands of innocent people have been arrested under false charges and political labelling. We strongly condemn this.

Joint raids by the police, RAB, BGB, and the army are still ongoing in residential areas, with common students and innocent people being arrested and harassed. Meanwhile, the police engaged in bribery schemes — detaining innocent people and then releasing them in exchange for large sums of money. The people of Bangladesh are living in uncertainty, with no security of life and no hope of justice.

From our history, we fear that this time, too, the brutal massacre of students will not be properly investigated. I presume that the judge in charge of the investigation will work to protect the government’s agenda and interests.

Under these circumstances, we are appealing to the United Nations for a fair investigation.

We want an impartial investigation into this murder. Reviewing past history, we see that whenever any state-backed body investigates, the government abuses its power to influence the investigation. Hence, we expect a proper investigation of this murder under the supervision of the United Nations.

Our question to the UN is, why and under which provision were military vehicles and equipment intended for peacekeeping missions used on students and civilians? Isn’t this an abuse of the UN? Isn’t it against the principles of the United Nations?

When the people of this country were being killed with weapons bearing the United Nations logo, the internet was completely shut down. The ordinary people of the country had the impression that they were being targeted as if by a UN peacekeeping mission.

We expect a clear explanation from the United Nations in this regard as soon as possible.

Our expectations from the international community: We, the common students and the young generation of Bangladesh, are going through a difficult time. First, we have been brutally massacred, and countless students have been injured. Now, false charges are being pressed against us. Students are victims of enforced disappearances, torture, and mass arrests.

We, the common students, are living with intense insecurity. Right now, we are seeking international intervention to resolve this situation.

We expect human rights organisations to recognise that Bangladesh is experiencing severe human rights violations. Women, children, elderly people, and young people are not safe inside or outside. Human rights have been violated, and crimes against humanity have been committed with lethal weapons. Students are being forcefully disappeared, murdered, and tortured, with the direct support of government forces and pro-government terrorists.

The current government is creating an atmosphere of fear and imposing curfews, violating people’s fundamental rights. In this context, we expect you, the human rights organisations, to monitor the situation in Bangladesh closely and protect the innocent people, including the common students.

We have expectations from our diaspora, too. Whenever we, the common students of Bangladesh, take to the streets with a rational demand, you support us. So, as always, we hope you will provide us with more support at this critical juncture.●

Abdul Hannan Masud is one of the dozens of coordinators of Students Against Discrimination, a platform for protesting students in Bangladesh. He has assumed a leadership role after other senior leaders were taken into custody by the police. The above text is an abridged version of a video statement given to Netra News. The statement was edited for clarity.

The United Nations and the international community should act to put an end to Bangladesh’s “ongoing massacre,” a leader of Bangladesh’s student protesters told journalists in a virtual press conference on 27th July.

“We urge the international community, influential countries, human rights groups, student bodies, and non-governmental organisations to take urgent steps to stop the brutal crackdown in Bangladesh,” said Abdul Hannan Masud, a coordinator of the Students Against Discrimination, joined by Mahin Sarker and Rifat Rashid.

Drawing parallels with the Pakistani military’s crackdown in what is now Bangladesh in 1971, they said members of the security forces and intelligence agencies are now hunting for student protesters in overnight raids, arresting students on mere suspicion, and detaining them in secret prisons.

“Members of these forces should be held accountable by the international community,” Hannan added.

Citing the use of vehicles and helicopters featuring the UN insignia during the civil unrest, the three leaders appealed to the international body to ensure accountability for the deaths.

Their group, Students Against Discrimination, has compiled a list of 266 people — among many more unidentified — who they said were killed during the protests. Bangladesh’s top newspaper, Prothom Alo, confirmed the death toll has surpassed 200.

The leaders said more than 70% of those deaths were ordinary students, according to their records.

They also threatened to resume their agitation from July 29th unless their demands — which include the release of imprisoned students, including top student leaders, the withdrawal of false charges, and visible punishments against government officials involved in the massacre, ranging from cabinet ministers to police constables — are met.

They also promised to set up a “health force” to document the killings and other casualties resulting from the government crackdown across towns and villages, and a separate “legal force” to provide legal assistance to those implicated in a barrage of government cases.

Local reports suggest that as many as 61,000 people, including many unnamed individuals, were implicated in criminal charges, while thousands have been arrested.

On July 28th, their planned programmes include writing and painting graffiti on public walls across the country in support of the students’ demands.

In recent days, several student leaders have been forced into hiding after other top leaders, including Nahid Islam, were picked up by police detectives from a hospital on the outskirts of Dhaka. The home minister, Asaduzzaman Kamal, claimed police took them into custody to “save them” from unspecified threats.

Before they were formally detained, Nahid and at least one other student leader reappeared after what they described as an enforced disappearance by state agencies. They showed signs of physical torture they had suffered during their detention to the press.

Bangladeshi students on university campuses began a protest in mid-July against a quota system in public jobs that favours descendants of the country’s registered freedom fighters, a small fraction of the population and a strong supporting block of the ruling Awami League.

Their protest soon transformed into civil unrest as security forces and Awami League members carried out deadly pogroms and a widespread crackdown, leading to hundreds of deaths and tens of thousands of injuries.●

In a scene in my novel The Inheritors, the narrator Nisar Chowdhury recalls a moment from his childhood in Dhaka in the 1980s. He’s playing tennis at Dhaka Club and at one point all of a sudden, he and others around him start coughing and gagging. There’s something in the air and it burns the lungs and stings the eyes, closes up the throat. It gets worse and worse and soon everyone runs inside the club building. Only years later does Nisar understand it was tear gas that he’d inhaled, and it had been deployed at student demonstrators at nearby Dhaka University, protesting the military regime of Lt. General Ershad.

The scene was loosely based on a real-life experience. During one of the many and constant demonstrations against Ershad’s dictatorship in that decade, I had been at Dhaka Club, and I had gagged on drifts of tear gas. They were coming from the direction of Dhaka University, where the police and the army were shooting tear gas shells, and bullets, at student protesters. While I had a notion of why the protests were happening, in my sheltered life, I was hardly, if at all, touched by them.

On another occasion, my family and I were driving down Manik Mia Avenue at night. Just as we turned onto the long stretch of road along the National Parliament, we saw a row of burning torches at the other end. It was a traditional moshal michhil, a torch procession. Of course, we were terrified. There was little we could do, and turning around, as I recall, was not a viable option. So, to my recollection, our driver turned the car off, and we sat there and waited.

The procession approached. It was silent as a funeral march. We braced for an attack. Why, I don’t know. Once it surrounded us, when our fears would come true, not an eye threw a second look our way. None of the marchers cared that our car was there, who we were, where we were going, or what our politics were. Like water, the procession rerouted around our vehicle, coalesced on the other side, and went on with its business.

Its business, as had been the case since Ershad came to power in 1982 in a “bloodless coup,” was to defy, denounce, and dismantle his martial law regime. In the end, the movement won. Ershad left office in a trail of corruption and disgrace in 1990.

A new generation of students is defying, denouncing, and vowing to dismantle the current autocracy of Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina and the Awami League. When it’s their time to leave, they too will exit in disgrace.

Who will take the reins is a question as terrifying as the violence with which Sheikh Hasina, her party, and their state police apparatuses have met the student demonstrations. The opposition, the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP), has proven themselves equally corrupt and disgraceful. If they were to come to power, the only changes would be in the state-sanctioned narrative of Bangladesh and its history, with Sheikh Mujibur Rahman’s name and portraits replaced with Ziaur Rahman’s. Then it will be business as usual: the cronyism, the corruption, the criminal dereliction of public service.

I am a member of the Bangladeshi diaspora, who also spent his childhood years in Bangladesh. I’m writing this in that capacity, as well as a writer whose works concern Bangladeshi history, politics, and current events, and as a professor in a US institution who is deeply invested in raising awareness in my classrooms about Bangladesh. I’m also writing it in full-throated support of the students.

As news of the protests started trickling in last week, and I checked the Bangladeshi sources before the media blackout, I had a feeling the anger and outrage were more than just about the quota system.

That issue was yet another spark in the conflagration that Bangladeshi politics and government have been burning in since Independence, whether it was Sheikh Mujibur Rahman’s consolidation of power and independent Bangladesh’s entrance into autocratic rule, the military coup in which he was assassinated, Zia’s murderous tenure before he too was killed, Ershad’s army rule, or the BNP and Awami League tyrannies that followed. Four successive “elections” later, Sheikh Hasina, with a new stranglehold on power as of January this year, continues the tradition. And so do the students, the vanguard of the country’s hope, with their defiance.

I returned to Bangladesh for one year between 2017 and 2018 to teach and finish my first novel, set during the Liberation War of 1971. In full disclosure, I taught at the University of Liberal Arts, whose founder, Kazi Anis Ahmed, has condemned the student protests, and whose brother is an Awami League politician and member of the Jatiya Sangsad. I also taught for a term at BRAC University. 

Every time I hear of a student killed by police fire, I wonder if they had been in one of my classes. Then I am filled with pride and appreciation for their courage, tenacity, and fearless spirit. It’s a wrenching balance, one part of which I wish weren’t happening.

I’ve heard it said the Awami League is finished. I hope it is. And I hope, too, it takes the BNP along with it. The moment a state represses a people’s movement against its corrupt practices, it has lost the fight. Its police, army, and firepower are signs of its weakness and insecurity. Its curfews are desperate tantrums. Its lies convince no one but themselves and their cronies. Whether it likes it or not, its power ultimately comes from the people, and lives and dies by the people.●

Nadeem Zaman is a Bangladeshi writer and academic based in the US.

প্রধানমন্ত্রী শেখ হাসিনাকে সম্প্রতি ভাঙ্গা কিছু কাঁচের জানালার সামনে দাঁড়িয়ে তার অতি-চর্চিত স্বভাবসুলভ কান্না-ভরা ভঙ্গিতে ছবি তুলেছেন। তার এই ফটোসেশনে অনুপস্থিত ছিল আওয়ামী লীগ সরকারের হাতে নিরপরাধ প্রাণ সংহারের নির্মম সব দৃশ্য। এতগুলো ঝরে যাওয়া প্রাণকে বয়ান থেকে একেবারেই মুছে ফেলা হয়েছে।

হাসিনা ও আওয়ামী লীগ নেতারা এখন তাদের চিরচেনা চিত্রনাট্য মেনে চলছে: কোনোভাবেই দায় নেয়া যাবে না, বিরোধী দলগুলোকে দোষারোপ করতে হবে, তদন্ত ও শাস্তির ওয়াদা দিতে হবে আর বিক্ষোভে রাস্তাঘাটের ক্ষয়ক্ষতি নিয়ে মায়াকান্না করতে হবে।

কিন্তু যেই শাসকগোষ্ঠী মানুষের প্রাণের চেয়ে সহায়-সম্পত্তিকে বেশি মূল্য দেয়, তাড়া এত এত মানুষ হত্যার তদন্ত করবে তা বিশ্বাস করা যায় না। যেই সরকার পরিণতির তোয়াক্কা না করে নাগরিকদের জখম ও খুন করে যেতে পারে, তারা নিজেদের কৃতকর্মের জন্য নিজেদেরকেই জবাবদিহির আওতায় আনবে — তা বিশ্বাস করা যায় না।

এই সরকার মিথ্যা বলে — যেমনটা বিক্ষোভের সময় ইন্টারনেট বন্ধ থাকা অবস্থায় সরকারি অপপ্রচার থেকে দেখা গেছে। তাই এই সরকার কোনো অবস্থাতেই নিজেদের অগুনতি মানবাধিকার লঙ্ঘনের সত্য প্রকাশ করবে না, করতে পারবেও না।

হাসিনা, আওয়ামী লীগ, তাদের ছাত্র সংগঠন ও আইন শৃঙ্খলা রক্ষাকারী বাহিনী — এরা সবাই নিজেদের ধরাছোঁয়ার উর্ধ্বে মনে করে। আর বাংলাদেশে এই বিশ্বাসই নির্মম বাস্তবতা। তারাই নির্ধারণ করে দেয় সত্য কী। অধিকার ও ন্যায়বিচারের দাবি তাদের এক কান দিয়ে ঢুকেছে, অপর কান দিয়ে বের হয়েছে।

কেবলমাত্র বাংলাদেশের বাইরে থেকেই তাদের এই মিথ্যার বসতি উন্মোচন করার উপায় আছে। সৌভাগ্যক্রমে, বাংলাদেশের সার্বভৌমত্বের সঙ্গে আপস না করেও এই মিথ্যা উন্মোচন করে দেয়ার আন্তর্জাতিক ব্যবস্থা পৃথিবীতে বিদ্যমান রয়েছে।

২০২২ সালে জিনা মাসা আমিনির মৃত্যুর পর ইরানের বিক্ষোভে হতাহতের ঘটনা অনুসন্ধানের জন্য চাপের মুখে পড়ে জাতিসংঘের মানবাধিকার পরিষদ। তারই ফলশ্রুতিতে জাতিসংঘ তদন্তের উদ্যোগ নেয়। জাতিসংঘের ফ্যাক্ট-ফাইন্ডিং মিশনের দায়িত্বের মধ্যে অন্তর্ভুক্ত ছিল মানবাধিকার লঙ্ঘনের ঘটনাসমূহ পুঙ্খানুপুঙ্খভাবে তদন্ত করা, সত্যতা প্রতিষ্ঠা করা, ভবিষ্যতের আইনি কার্যক্রমের জন্য প্রমাণ সংগ্রহ ও সংরক্ষণ করা এবং সংশ্লিষ্ট আংশীদারদের সম্পৃক্ত করা।

আবু সাঈদও রাষ্ট্রীয় সন্ত্রাসের বিরুদ্ধে সাহস নিয়ে দাঁড়িয়েছিলেন। নিজের প্রতিবাদের অধিকার প্রয়োগ করেছিলেন। তাকে পুলিশ গুলি করে হত্যা করে। তার মৃত্যু ভিডিওতে ধারণও করা হয়। কিন্তু তাকে গুলিবিদ্ধ করা পুলিশ সদস্য কিংবা তাদের উর্ধ্বতন কর্মকর্তা কিংবা এই সহিংস দমনপীড়নের পরিকল্পনায় জড়িত আওয়ামী লীগ নেতাদের কোনো বিচার হয়নি।

এই ধরণের অসংখ্য রাষ্ট্রীয় পৃষ্ঠপোষকতাপ্রাপ্ত হত্যার ঘটনা জবাবদিহিতার দাবি রাখে।

কিন্তু আওয়ামী লীগের অধীনে তেমনটা কখনই ঘটবে না। জাতিসংঘের মানবাধিকার পরিষদের স্বাধীন তদন্ত তাই অত্যন্ত গুরুত্বপূর্ণ। জাতিসংঘের দায়টা এখানে একটু বেশিই — কেননা তাদের শান্তিরক্ষী কার্যক্রমে ব্যবহৃত যানবাহন ব্যবহার করে বাংলাদেশে হত্যাযজ্ঞ চালানো হয়েছে। আর যারা সেই হত্যাযজ্ঞ চালিয়েছে, তাদেরকেই জাতিসংঘ আবার সুদূর কোনো মহাদেশে শান্তিরক্ষী হিসেবে নিয়োগ দেয়।

বাংলাদেশের তরুণ আন্দোলনকারীরা সতর্কঘণ্টা বাজিয়েছে। এখন জাতিসংঘকে এমন একটি তদন্তের জন্য চাপ দেওয়ার দায়িত্ব বর্তায় দেশে ও বিদেশে অবস্থানরত বাংলাদেশি জনগণ ও বৈশ্বিক মানবাধিকার সংস্থাগুলোর উপর।

দিনশেষে জবাবদিহিতা ও ন্যায়বিচার প্রতিষ্ঠিত করতেই হবে।