The strength of Western democracies lies in their commitment to the rule of law and the protection of fundamental rights. Despite their imperfections, democratic systems in countries such as the United States and the United Kingdom remain among the most trusted governance models in the world.
Having lived in the United States for over 38 years, I have seen first-hand the value of the rule of law. No individual is considered above the law, and the institutions of the state operate with a level of independence that ensures accountability. The three pillars of democracy — the Executive, the Legislature, and the Judiciary — act as checks and balances. Without an independent judiciary, democracy cannot survive.
Sadly, these fundamentals are currently absent in Bangladesh under the interim government led by Nobel Laureate Dr. Muhammad Yunus. The government lacks constitutional legitimacy, the judiciary is widely perceived as compromised, and the rule of law has significantly deteriorated. Numerous political leaders, journalists, civil society members, academics, and human rights activists have faced fabricated cases designed to silence dissent.
Would the West Ever Accept Banning Opposition Parties?
President Abraham Lincoln defined democracy as “government of the people, by the people, and for the people.” If citizens are deprived of their right to vote freely, choose their candidates, or elect their preferred political party, can such a system still be called a democracy? Certainly not.
Imagine a scenario in which President Donald Trump decided to ban the Democratic Party from participating in U.S. elections. Would the American people accept it? Absolutely not.
Similarly, if the UK Prime Minister Sir Starmer were to ban the Conservative Party from contesting elections, would British citizens tolerate such an assault on democracy? Again, the answer is no.
If these nations would never accept such an undemocratic move within their own borders, why should similar actions be tolerated elsewhere? It is safe to conclude that Western nations would never support the banning of major political parties in their own countries — nor should they endorse such actions abroad.
UNDP in Bangladesh acts against their own Mandate and Principle?
Would the United Nations ever support an election in the United States or the United Kingdom that excluded major political parties? If such a scenario were even suggested, the U.S. Congress would justifiably reconsider its funding for UN programs promoting “democracy” without actual participation of the people. President Trump would be advised to stop contributing to the UN fund.
It is time for UN member states to reassess support for programs that undermine, rather than strengthen, democratic rights.
In Bangladesh, the UNDP is supporting the interim government’s initiative to hold an election that excludes the majority-supported political organizations. The Awami League (AL) has stated that “UNDP’s BALLOT project, in its current form, is neither inclusive nor credible, and risks violating UN principles and the UNDP mandate to promote free, fair, and participatory elections.”
Why Is Dr. Yunus Afraid of Party Participation?
After more than 15 months of “reform” game without public consultation or participation, Dr. Yunus reluctantly announced an election for February 2026. Yet he continues to bar major political parties from taking part — including those with the largest public mandates.
For example, the Awami League — the party that led Bangladesh’s independence, transformed the country’s economy, and elevated it to developing-country status — has been banned from contesting. The Jatiya Party (JP), which governed for over nine years and has a substantial support base, has also been barred. Together, these two parties have historically secured the support of a clear majority of voters.
Independent assessments, media reports, and political observers indicate that public support for the Awami League has grown in recent months due to widespread dissatisfaction with the interim government’s performance. Estimates suggest that AL and JP together now command the confidence of well over 60% or 65% percent, more than half of the electorate.
Governance Failure of the Yunus Interim Government: A dismal scenario
During the tenure of the interim government, Bangladesh has experienced a sharp economic decline. Independent assessments suggest that poverty has risen by more than 10 percentage points from 17% to 28% since late 2024. According to industry sources and national media reports, hundreds of factories have shut down or suspended operations, unemployment has risen, and ordinary citizens are struggling with soaring living costs, insecurity, and erosion of services. There is no guarantee of security of life and property. Rather anarchy, extortion. murders and jihadi mob violence have become norm rather than exception. People are worried and shaky.
When a government loses public confidence to this extent, excluding the most popular parties from elections only deepens instability.
The Dangers of a Voter-less Election: A Lesson from 1996
Bangladesh has witnessed a “voter-less election” before — in February 1996 — when turnout dropped to approximately 21%. The result produced a government with no legitimacy that collapsed in just 12 days, forcing new elections under a caretaker government in June 1996.
History clearly shows: elections without participation of the people are unsustainable and lead to chaos, instability, and governance paralysis.
Democracy Cannot Be Imposed From Abroad
Dr. Yunus has engaged several foreign consultants, unfamiliar with Bangladesh’s history and political landscape, to craft a new model of governance for the country. These efforts lacked local consultation, transparency, or ownership. Democracy cannot be engineered in boardrooms or imposed externally — it must be shaped through engagement with the people.
When Senegal’s President Léopold Senghor pushed for a one-party model in the 1960s, the United States responded that democracy cannot be forced from the top. Veteran politician Senator Edward Kennedy reminded us again and again “Democracy matures through practice — through trial and error — not through imposition.”
The same lesson applies now. Imposing a form of democracy that excludes major political forces is destined to fail.
What Must Western Leaders Do?
The interim government must immediately lift all bans on political parties and withdraw fabricated cases against politicians, journalists, and activists. Political detainees must be released to create an enabling environment for inclusive and participatory election.
Western governments, particularly the United States — which champions global democracy — have a responsibility to:
– Insist that the interim government lift the ban on political parties
– Ensure withdrawal of political cases and release of detainees
– Call for Dr. Yunus to resign as Chief Adviser and transfer authority to a neutral caretaker administration
– Support an election within two months that guarantees a level playing field for all parties.
We appreciate the observations of Tulsi Gabbard, Director of National Intelligence who stated that the policy of regime change is over now under Trump administration as it creates more enemies. She appears to be right as after the regime change in Bangladesh, the new government of Dr. Yunus is buying more weapons from China vis-a-vis USA and it allowed China, an enemy of USA to build military bases in Bangladesh.
To manage the situation, it may be time for the USA to take action as President Carter’s National Security Adviser Dr. Zbigniew Brzezinski warned: “Inaction will surely lead to more violence, bloodshed, and uncertainty.”
Failure to act now risks Western nations losing a strategic, long-time friend — and their credibility in defending democracy.
