The past two weeks in Bangladesh have been marked by a series of significant events and developments, reflecting the nation’s evolving political, social, and international landscape. From the celebration of Victory Day 2024 amidst growing internal divisions to the High Court’s landmark verdict revisiting the Fifteenth Amendment, the period has been both reflective and transformative. Dr. Muhammad Yunus’s push for stronger Bangladesh-Pakistan ties during the Cairo Summit has sparked controversy, while his Victory Day speech announcing election plans has drawn widespread criticism.
International attention has also been sharply focused on Bangladesh, with The New York Times shedding light on the precarious situation of the country’s Hindu minority and The Economist offering a contentious perspective on Bangladesh’s achievements. Meanwhile, the government’s request for India to extradite Sheikh Hasina has added a new dimension to the complex dynamics between Bangladesh, India, and Pakistan, raising concerns about shifting regional ties. Domestically, the announcement of the “July Uprising Proclamation” has stirred debate, with opinions divided on whether it represents a revolutionary vision or impractical ambitions. Amidst this turbulence, the prospect of a new political movement, referred to as “The Third Force,” has emerged as a potential game-changer, hinting at a reshaping of Bangladesh’s political landscape.
Instability Grows Under Dr. Yunus’s Interim Government
Dr. Muhammad Yunus and his interim government have completed five months in office, marked by growing instability and public dissatisfaction. The administration’s failure to address key issues—such as deteriorating law and order, rising inflation, industrial unrest, and disorder in educational institutions—has intensified public discontent. Citizens in both rural and urban areas feel increasingly insecure, with crimes against property and the spread of rumours, misinformation, and propaganda adding to the unease.
Media Control Sparks Outrage
The interim government’s control over the media has drawn sharp criticism. A recent incident involving SAD leader Hasnat Abdullah, who allegedly pressured the owner of Somoy Television to remove five journalists, triggered widespread outrage among media professionals and the general public. Even journalists traditionally critical of the AL have started speaking out against the government’s excessive control of the press.
Controversial Fire Incident in the Secretariat
A fire in the Secretariat, a designated Class 1 Key Point Installation (KPI), burned the offices of two student advisors, raising concerns about security. Rumours circulating about the advisors’ involvement in the fire, as well as allegations of explosives being brought in from Pakistan, have further fuelled public apprehension and speculation.
International Diplomacy and Mixed Reactions
Dr. Yunus’s recent conversation with U.S. National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan has also sparked debate. While supporters highlighted the U.S.’s appreciation of the interim government, critics interpreted the interaction differently, suggesting that Sullivan urged Yunus to prioritize minority security in Bangladesh.
Failed Attempt to Stoke Anti-Indian Sentiment
In late November and early December, the government attempted to shift public focus by promoting anti-Indian sentiment and calling for national unity. However, this strategy lost traction by mid-December, as domestic challenges, including violence, robberies, fires, and mob unrest, returned to the forefront. A Note Verbale sent to India, requesting Sheikh Hasina’s extradition for trial, failed to elicit a public reaction, further undermining the government’s narrative.
Significant Events Amid the Chaos
Amidst these challenges, Bangladesh observed its 53rd Independence Day and Christmas Day, both overshadowed by the nation’s turmoil. The period was also marked by a landmark High Court verdict revisiting the Fifteenth Amendment, which could have profound implications for Bangladesh’s future. However, the activities of SAD leaders and student advisors have continued to generate controversy.
Looking Ahead
The last 15 days of December have been particularly challenging for Dr. Yunus and his interim government. With public dissatisfaction mounting and rumours about a “Proclamation of July Uprising” scheduled for December 31, 2024, the period has added new dimensions to the political crisis. Whether the government can regain public trust and stabilize the nation remains uncertain. Reports attached to this write-up provide further details on these critical developments.
Bangladesh Victory Day 2024: A Shift in Focus Amid Growing Divisions
Bangladesh’s 53rd Victory Day, celebrated on December 16, 2024, marked a notable departure from traditional observances. For 17 years, national programs and media had prominently honoured Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, the 1971 martyrs, freedom fighters, and India’s pivotal role in the Liberation War. However, this year, these figures and contributions were conspicuously absent, reflecting a deliberate shift in focus toward the July-August Movement.
Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Victory Day message stirred controversy and protests in Bangladesh, as critics claimed it insufficiently acknowledged the sacrifices of the Bangladeshi people during the Liberation War, heightening anti-India sentiments.
Adviser Mahfuz Alam drew criticism by sharing a contentious map of Bangladesh that included India’s Seven Sisters and West Bengal, while Adviser Dr. Asif Nazrul fuelled tensions by minimizing India’s role in 1971. Meanwhile, anti-liberation groups like JeI and ICS actively organized Victory Day events, further exacerbating divisions.
Victory Day Speech: Election Plans Spark Criticism
Dr. Muhammad Yunus, Chief Advisor of Bangladesh’s interim government, addressed the nation on Victory Day, focusing on two key topics: the upcoming national elections and the creation of a National Consensus Building Commission (NCBC).
He proposed a tentative election timeline between late 2025 and mid-2026, contingent on completing key reforms like updating the voter list and implementing recommendations from six reform commissions. A comprehensive voter list, particularly to include first-time young voters, was emphasized. However, the lack of a clear roadmap for these reforms raised doubts about their feasibility.
Dr. Yunus also announced the NCBC to build consensus on crucial issues such as electoral reforms and election timelines. Chaired by Dr. Yunus with Professor Ali Riaz as Vice-Chairman, the commission will involve leaders of seven reform commissions. Despite its collaborative intent, significant differences over core political issues may hinder progress.
The interim government reiterated its commitment to holding elections under a neutral caretaker framework and implementing political reforms for long-term stability. However, the speech faced widespread criticism, particularly from the BNP and other political figures, due to the absence of a clear election timeline and structured reform plan.
Key Concerns:
Ambiguity in Election Timeline: The proposed timeframe (late 2025 to mid-2026) lacked clarity, with conflicting statements suggesting elections might occur by June 2026.
Lack of Election Preparation: Despite forming an Election Commission, no tangible progress has been made toward organizing elections.
Inconsistent Communication: Discrepancies between official statements and the speech have fuelled public confusion, highlighting the need for clearer messaging.
Demand for Early Elections: Political leaders and stakeholders are urging swift electoral reforms and a definitive election date to ensure transparency and accountability.
Growing public frustration reflects concerns over the lack of urgency, transparency, and preparation, casting doubt on the process’s credibility and trustworthiness.
Dr. Yunus Pushes for Stronger Bangladesh-Pakistan Ties in Cairo
Dr. Muhammad Yunus, Chief Advisor of Bangladesh’s interim government, recently visited Cairo to enhance bilateral relations and explore collaborative opportunities with Egypt. During the visit, he held discussions with Egyptian leaders, including President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi, focusing on economic partnerships, trade, and strategies for mutual growth.
A significant highlight of the trip was Dr. Yunus’s meeting with the Pakistani Prime Minister in Cairo, their second engagement following a meeting in New York in late September. While official statements claimed Dr. Yunus sought clarification on Pakistan’s role during the 1971 Liberation War, analysts believe the discussions centred on efforts to strengthen bilateral relations and cooperation within SAARC.
The talks reportedly focused on strategies to marginalize India’s regional influence by enhancing Bangladesh-Pakistan collaboration in security, economic, social, and cultural sectors. Discussions also included positioning Pakistan as an alternative partner to India for Bangladesh in commerce and security, reflecting a coordinated effort to recalibrate regional dynamics and reduce India’s dominance in South Asia.
High Court Verdict: Revisiting the Fifteenth Amendment
The High Court Bench, comprising Justice Farah Mahbub and Justice Debashish Roy Chowdhury, delivered a landmark verdict on December 17, 2024, following the final hearing on writ petitions challenging the validity of the Fifteenth Amendment to the Constitution. This amendment, passed on June 30, 2011, during the tenure of the AL government, abolished the caretaker government system and introduced several other significant constitutional changes. The writ, filed on August 18, 2023, by prominent citizens including Badiul Alam Majumdar, secretary of Shushashoner Jonno Nagorik (SHUJAN), questioned the amendment’s alignment with the constitution. Multiple political parties, such as the BNP, Gano Forum, and JeI, alongside various organizations and individuals, joined as interveners in the case, highlighting its broad political and public significance.
Potential Changes in the Constitution after the High Court Verdict:
1. The reinstatement of a neutral, non-partisan caretaker government system (Pending Supreme Court decision).
2. The annulment of unconstitutional state power acquisition and abrogation of the constitution (Completed).
3. The removal of the unamendable status of the constitution’s basic features (Completed).
4. The reintroduction of the referendum system for constitutional amendments (Completed).
5. The decision on removing Sheikh Mujibur Rahman’s title as the “Father of the Nation” (To be determined by the next Parliament).
6. The decision on removing Sheikh Mujibur Rahman’s “Declaration of Independence” from the constitution (To be determined by Parliament).
7. The status of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman’s March 7 speech in the constitution (To be determined by Parliament).
8. The requirement to display Sheikh Mujibur Rahman’s portrait in all government, semi-government, and autonomous offices (To be determined by Parliament).
9. Parliamentary decision on state principles—secularism, socialism, nationalism—and the status of Islam as the state religion.
The High Court verdict was anticipated, and those familiar with the current context could easily foresee the outcome. Given the merits of the writ, it was expected that the decision would favour the petitioners. The interim government, the law ministry, the Attorney General, and his team were all aligned with the petitioners’ position. The Chairperson of the High Court Bench, Justice Farha Mahbub, is reputed for her connections to the BNP. Her late father, Mahbubur Rahman, was a BNP minister and a multiple-term Member of Parliament. Historically, during the AL government’s tenure, her court was seen as a refuge for BNP and JeI affiliates. Similarly, the junior member of the Bench, Justice Debashish Roy Chowdhury, a recent appointee under alleged political considerations, also has strong BNP ties. He is the son of BNP Vice Chairman Nitai Roy Chowdhury, while his sister, Nipun Roy Chowdhury, serves as the General Secretary of BNP’s Dhaka District Unit. Furthermore, Nipun’s father-in-law, Goyeshshor Chandra Roy, is a member of the BNP National Standing Committee. The High Court’s decision addressed specific aspects of the case, but other pending features, which were also expected to be annulled, remain unresolved.
Final Comments:
The High Court’s verdict has sparked substantial debate, addressed pivotal constitutional issues leaving several matters unresolved. Among the potential changes are the reinstatement of a caretaker government system and the status of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman’s contributions within the constitution, which remain subject to future parliamentary decisions. The ruling has also raised questions about judicial impartiality due to the political affiliations of the Bench members. As the country awaits the Supreme Court’s decision and subsequent parliamentary actions, this verdict represents a critical juncture in shaping Bangladesh’s constitutional and political future.
Bangladesh’s Hindus: A Story of Fear and Facts
A December 24, 2024, report by The New York Times titled “Sorting Fact From Fiction as Fear Engulfs Bangladesh’s Hindus” highlights a volatile situation where Hindu minorities in Bangladesh face escalating violence, including vandalism and mob attacks on temples. While some of these incidents are real, exaggerated reports, particularly from Indian media, have complicated the true nature of the threat.
Key Points:
Real Attacks on Hindus and Temples:
Hindu temples have been targeted, with some vandalized and set ablaze, notably in Dhaka and Chattogram. Mobs have attacked Hindu homes and places of worship, particularly after Friday prayers, in a climate of growing tension.
Politicization and Religious Tensions:
The arrest of Hindu monk Chinmoy Krishna Das led to violent clashes, with a Muslim lawyer killed during protests. The violence has a political edge, with tensions exacerbated by political affiliations. Extremist groups, marginalized during former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina’s rule, have reemerged after her fall, contributing to the violence.
Government’s Failure to Act:
The interim government, led by Nobel laureate Muhammad Yunus, has downplayed the threats to Hindus, despite reports of rising attacks. While arrests have been made, the lack of consistent protection and a failure to tackle political and religious violence leaves Hindus vulnerable. Both the government and opposition forces are accused of exploiting the situation for political gain, exacerbating Hindu fears.
Spread of Misinformation:
False reports and fabricated footage, particularly from Indian media, have muddied the situation. Claims of temple fires, such as the Navagraha Bari incident, were later debunked, yet they continued to spread, often for political purposes. Such misinformation creates confusion and inflates the severity of the violence, making it difficult for the international community and local authorities to accurately assess the situation.
Community Impact:
The fear among Bangladesh’s Hindu community is palpable, with businesses struggling and leaders feeling increasingly marginalized. Hindu residents are particularly fearful of political and religious violence that targets their community.
The New York Times report underscores the precarious situation of Hindus in Bangladesh, with real attacks exacerbated by political exploitation and misinformation. The interim government’s inability to address the violence and its failure to protect minority communities has left Hindus vulnerable, while international media and political narratives further complicate the crisis.
Final Comments:
Dr. Muhammad Yunus has long been recognized for his adept skill in brand building and crafting a favourable image in global media and among international audiences. However, amid mounting criticism over his failure to address minority persecution in Bangladesh, some critics familiar with his methods speculate that he may have influenced The New York Times to publish a report on the minority situation in the country. Observers note that the report appears to strive for balance, likely reflecting the publication’s commitment to professional journalistic ethics.
The Economist’s Nod to Bangladesh: Celebrating or Misleading?
In December 2024, The Economist selected Bangladesh as its “Country of the Year,” recognizing the nation’s significant political transformation. The grounds for The Economist selecting Bangladesh as “Country of the Year 2024” can be summarized as follows:
The Economist’s Arguments
Improvement Over the Last Year: The Economist awarded its recognition to Bangladesh for showing the most improvement in governance and political reform over the past year, focusing on political developments rather than wealth or overall happiness.
Ousting an Autocrat: The magazine highlighted the removal of Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, whom it described as a “despot,” viewing this as a significant step towards political change and democratic progress in Bangladesh.
Move Towards Liberal Governance: The Economist praised Bangladesh’s shift toward a more liberal government, framing it as a positive move toward democratic reforms, particularly with the transition to an interim government.
Power Transition: The relatively peaceful shift of power to an interim government under Nobel laureate Dr. Muhammad Yunus was noted by The Economist, despite Bangladesh’s history of violent political transitions.
Support from Key Groups: The interim government, led by Dr. Yunus, garnered support from key groups, including students, civil society, and business leaders, which was seen as an indicator of positive political change.
Economic Stabilization: The interim government was credited with stabilizing the economy, despite the ongoing economic challenges that Bangladesh faces.
Restoration of Order: The Economist viewed the transition as an opportunity to restore order and stabilize the country, particularly after years of political and social unrest.
Progress in the Past Year: The Economist emphasized Bangladesh’s political transition as the most notable improvement of the year, overlooking the country’s broader economic and social struggles in favour of political change.
Arguments Against The Economist’s Decision
Underestimating Islamic Radicalism: Critics argue that The Economist has overlooked the growing influence of Islamic extremism in Bangladesh, which has fuelled violence against Hindus and other minorities. The increasing radicalism has worsened communal tensions, yet the magazine has failed to fully address this issue.
Overlooking Human Rights Violations: Reports of persecution against indigenous people, opposition figures, and journalists have been largely ignored. The magazine’s focus on political transition overlooks the widespread human rights violations occurring under the interim government.
Ignoring Communal Violence: Attacks on Hindus and other minority groups have surged, but The Economist has downplayed the severity of these developments. The magazine’s analysis focuses more on political changes, neglecting the rising communal violence and its impact on vulnerable communities.
Mischaracterizing the Transition: The regime change, while portrayed as peaceful by The Economist, was actually marked by mob-led violence and instability. This shift in power more closely resembles the upheaval seen in Sri Lanka than the smooth transition the magazine suggests.
Mobocracy Over Democracy: Critics argue that rather than a democratic process, the public effectively seized control of the government, leading to a system of mob rule rather than stable governance. This undermines the core principles of democratic transition and governance.
Failure to Organize Elections: The Yunus-led interim government has failed to hold elections within the promised timeline, using judicial mechanisms to extend its rule until 2026. This erosion of democratic credibility calls into question the government’s commitment to upholding democratic principles.
Economic Decline: Contrary to The Economist‘s claims of economic stabilization, Bangladesh is grappling with severe economic challenges, including high inflation, a balance of payments crisis, and decelerating GDP growth. Experts, including the IMF, warn that the country risks economic collapse if investment is not swiftly accelerated.
Deteriorating Law and Order: Under the interim government, political violence has escalated, with leaders and supporters of the ousted Awami League being targeted. There has been a rise in politically motivated killings, and the law and order situation has worsened, with professionals like judges and educators being forced out of their roles.
Undermining the Liberation Legacy: Critics argue that The Economist‘s recognition of Bangladesh discredits the legacy of the 1971 Bangladesh Liberation War. The country’s outreach to Pakistan, a nation complicit in the genocide of Bengalis—especially Hindus—during the war, is seen as a betrayal of the sacrifices made during the liberation movement.
Erosion of Press Freedom: The government has significantly clamped down on press freedom, targeting journalists and media outlets. This attack on freedom of expression and dissent further undermines the country’s democratic credentials.
Displacement of Professionals: The interim government has removed numerous professionals, including judges, educators, and other public figures, which has further destabilized institutional frameworks and eroded public confidence in the country’s governance.
Final Comments;
Many critics argue that The Economist’s decision to name Bangladesh the “Country of the Year 2024” reflects a selective focus on regime change and perceived liberal progress, while ignoring the country’s worsening economic, social, and political crises. While the magazine lauds the political transition, Bangladesh continues to grapple with escalating communal violence, suppression of dissent, failure to hold timely elections, and a fragile economy. These pressing issues have led critics to view the country’s current trajectory as one of instability rather than meaningful progress.
The interim government, led by Dr. Muhammad Yunus, has come under fire for its inability to uphold democratic principles, with the prolonged delay in organizing elections further undermining its credibility. Critics suggest that The Economist’s omission of these critical realities raises questions about the depth and impartiality of its assessment of Bangladesh’s future.
Dr. Muhammad Yunus is widely recognized for his skill in cultivating a positive global image, often leveraging significant resources to do so. In recent years, he has reportedly funded advertisements in prominent international outlets to enhance his reputation. Amid growing criticism of his interim government’s failures—including deteriorating law and order, rising inflation, economic instability, minority persecution, and mounting demands to hold elections by 2025—some speculate that he may have influenced The Economist’s decision.
This recognition, critics argue, downplays the struggles faced by ordinary citizens and presents an overly favourable portrayal of Dr. Yunus’s leadership. Neutral and impartial evaluations of Bangladesh’s situation reveal a starkly different reality, one that The Economist appears to have overlooked. The accolade has therefore drawn scepticism, with many questioning whether it is part of a broader narrative to elevate Dr. Yunus’s standing while contrasting it with Sheikh Hasina’s ousted government, often criticized for authoritarianism and mismanagement. Such concerns have fuelled doubts about the credibility and motivations behind this international recognition.
Sheikh Hasina’s Extradition: A Complex Issue Between Bangladesh and India
Bangladesh has submitted a ‘Note Verbale’ to India requesting the extradition of former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina to face trial for human rights violations and alleged genocide. This raises questions about India’s legal response and the impact on bilateral relations.
Legal Grounds for Refusing Extradition:
Political Nature of the Offenses: The charges against Sheikh Hasina, primarily related to the 2024 protests, are politically motivated. Under the India-Bangladesh Extradition Treaty, extradition can be denied for political offenses, especially those targeting opposition during sensitive periods.
Risk of Unfair Trial and Torture: Bangladesh’s political climate raises concerns about the impartiality of its legal system. The International Crimes Tribunal (ICT) has faced criticism for its political bias, which could lead to an unfair trial for Hasina. Additionally, political violence and instability in Bangladesh pose risks to her safety, potentially subjecting her to inhumane treatment.
Humanitarian Concerns: The risk of torture, legal intimidation, or political attacks in Bangladesh could be used by India as a humanitarian reason to deny extradition, particularly if Hasina’s life is in danger.
Challenges for India:
Diplomatic Tensions: Refusing extradition could strain India-Bangladesh relations, with Bangladesh potentially perceiving this as an affront to justice and sovereignty, given the political nature of the charges.
Public Opinion in Bangladesh: India’s refusal could fuel anti-India sentiment, particularly among opposition parties and the public critical of Hasina’s leadership, worsening domestic discontent.
Regional Security: A decline in bilateral relations could affect security cooperation on issues like cross-border terrorism and border management.
Economic Cooperation Strain: Diplomatic tensions might disrupt ongoing trade agreements and infrastructure projects, negatively impacting both nations’ economies.
India’s decision on the extradition request involves a delicate balance between legal considerations, humanitarian concerns, and the potential for regional instability, all of which could significantly affect India-Bangladesh relations.
The fortnight has laid bare the deep-seated challenges and emerging opportunities facing Bangladesh. Internally, the government’s actions, including controversial diplomatic manoeuvres and domestic policies, have polarized the nation and intensified public scrutiny. Victory Day, a moment traditionally marked by unity, was overshadowed by criticism of the interim government’s governance and its handling of national and regional issues.
On the international stage, the spotlight on minority rights and media narratives has highlighted vulnerabilities within the country, while the evolving dynamics between Bangladesh, India, and Pakistan signal a potential shift in South Asian geopolitics. The High Court’s decision to revisit constitutional amendments and the potential rise of “The Third Force” suggest that the country is on the cusp of political and social transformation.
As Bangladesh navigates this turbulent period, the nation faces critical questions: Will the government address growing internal dissent and international criticism? Can the emerging political movements and judicial reforms bridge the widening divisions? The answers to these questions will define the country’s path forward, setting the stage for its future amid uncertainty and opportunity.
Sahadat Russell, Associate Editor The Voice.