Swadesh Roy
The nature of the sideline meeting between Muhammad Yunus and Shri Narendra Modi suggests that India had diplomatically kept things hanging in a state of “uncertainty.” Yet, Muhammad Yunus had come with at least one preparation—which, at this moment, was most crucial for him. That is, to look for an exit route from the “reset button,” the “July Revolution,” and the “mastermind-planned success.” Finding this way out was vital for him because the Biden administration in the USA has not only ended but the system itself has started to change. In other words, the global game of giving democratic coverage under the guise of “US-aided revolution” against terrorism is now seemingly coming to a halt.
On the other hand, the movement that led to Sheikh Hasina’s fall couldn’t be portrayed as a mass uprising, despite control over the entire media. The alternative reality became apparent very quickly. Because, immediately after Hasina’s fall, “March for Caliphate” rallies erupted across Dhaka and the rest of the country. The walls throughout the country were plastered with posters supporting the “March for Caliphate.” Hindus in Bangladesh are now facing the worst persecution since 1955. Regardless of how many counterarguments are offered, violence erupts in India only when both sides have some strength. In such situations, minorities can still survive. But cleansing or persecution happens only when minorities are left entirely powerless. And this powerlessness primarily stems from the government denying the persecution. When the government denies, the administration receives a signal. Ethnic cleansing happens silently and takes such multifaceted forms that it becomes unbearable for anyone to withstand. People are then forced to flee their country. Minorities worldwide are so helpless that they practically have no friends.
Moreover, a significant danger facing Bangladeshi Hindus now is the West Bengal state government in neighboring India—home to Bengali Hindus—is no longer empathetic toward them like the governments of post-1947 or post-1971. Instead, they are engrossed in power politics. Furthermore, the leftist forces in West Bengal are not humanistic or educated like their counterparts in Tamil Nadu. Most of them are like rotten fish heads, emitting foul ideology. Tamil Nadu’s leftists are always united and pressure the Indian government whenever Tamil Hindus face oppression in Sri Lanka, demanding border openings and safety for those affected. While similar responses came from West Bengal in the past, now it’s mostly the opposite. Ironically, Yunus’ “mastermind” advisor wants to take the country back to the 1947 “arrangement.”
At the time they talk about returning Bangladesh to that “arrangement,” young Hindu activists were peacefully demonstrating for their rights under the leadership of Chimmoy Prabhu, out of love for their land and country. Their right to live in their own country was met with fabricated allegations against Prabhu, who was imprisoned. His associates were brutally attacked in the streets—leaving them mentally shattered and extinguishing their hopes. Today’s Hindu youth have been pushed to a point where revoking the Indira-Mujib treaty and reviving the Nehru-Liaquat Pact seem like natural demands.
And it’s not just the persecution of Hindus. Police killings have been indemnified—though the terrorists confessed to the murders on television. Women, progressive Muslims, and above all, intellectuals with Bengali nationalist ideals have been silenced—either through fear, attacks, or false cases. The outline of this scenario was illustrated in the New York Times’ print lead article a day before the Yunus-Modi sideline meeting, though the article had been online two days earlier. While this wasn’t new, as major outlets like the BBC had also covered such news, when a legacy Democratic-leaning media like the NYT highlights it, someone as intelligent as Yunus can’t fail to understand the reality behind his “reset button” and the meticulously designed “July Revolution.”
Standing on this reality, after his sideline meeting with Modi, Yunus did not gift him the graffiti book on the July Revolution. Instead, he gave Modi a beautifully framed photo of the moment when Modi had once awarded him. During the meeting, Yunus didn’t mention the July Revolution at all but repeatedly referred to the 1971 Liberation War and India’s role in it. The message he intended to send was quite clear and needed no further explanation.
Old political parties like the BNP and CPB had long been urging Yunus to accept this truth. They also say that the fall of Sheikh Hasina’s government doesn’t mean the convicted militants should be freed, nor should their trials be stopped. Justice must prevail even for those who murdered police and innocent minorities.
Furthermore, while Yunus set aside the graffiti book and presented himself individually, the character of his “appointed” student leaders has now been exposed to the public. Bangladesh has experienced student movements in 1969 and 1990, and the people know the integrity and contributions of those student leaders. In contrast, Yunus’ chosen student leaders—who once said they didn’t even have decent homes or wallets—are now riding cars worth crores and wearing watches worth 4 million taka. Within just seven months, their lifestyle has mimicked that of Obaidul Quader. Nobody dreams of a future with them anymore.
This is not all. The country’s last refuge is the army—a disciplined force that has kept the nation afloat. As other institutions have been crippled through police murders, mass OSDs in the civil service, mob invasions of the Supreme Court, fake cases and attacks on journalists, and militant parades in front of newspaper offices—only the army has maintained order. Yet, Yunus’ appointees have even publicly insulted the army chief, a matter of national shame. It’s unimaginable that someone like Yunus would still harbor hope in these so-called student leaders.
At the same time, a new truth must be urgently considered by all patriotic people. A country like Bangladesh, whose economic growth in the past fifteen years was remarkable and is set to become a middle-income country by 2026, can no longer afford to remain on the sidelines—attending private events or hoping for brief meetings with foreign leaders. Since independence, this country has been ruled by multiple elected governments and two strong military regimes in times of political vacuum. But it has never stayed on the sidelines like now. A country remaining on the sidelines is an insult to its people. Therefore, the sooner Bangladesh comes out of this marginal position, forms a strong government, and holds inclusive elections, the sooner the country can get back on track.
Back in 1971, from the Independent Bangladesh Radio, Rathindranath Roy used to sing aloud—“Amari desh, shob manusher” (This is my country, a land for all people).
Author: State Award-Winning Journalist, Editor of Sarakkhon and The Present World,(Bangladeshi news outlets)