People’s power in BD | Translate into Urdu IDAWN Article 07-08-2024|

PEOPLE’S power has toppled one more authoritarian regime. Another bloody day in Bangladesh ended in triumph for the uprising in that country. Defying a nationwide curfew, hundreds of thousands of people came out onto the streets, bringing an end to prime minister Sheikh Hasina Wajed’s back-to-back 15-year rule. The military has now taken charge, putting in place an interim administration. But can this end the political turmoil that has shaken the South Asian nation? The situation continues to unfold.

It all started with protests by students against a controversial job quota system, which soon turned into a mass movement against a regime that, under Hasina Wajed, had secured a fourth straight term in office a few months ago through a controversial electoral exercise. The government had virtually established a one-party system, eliminating the opposition from the political scene. The enforcement of draconian laws had turned Bangladesh into an authoritarian state.

But student protests broke the fear. The use of coercive power by the administration to crush the demonstrations exacerbated the anger. Hundreds of protesters were killed by the security forces, turning the streets into battlegrounds. Bangladesh has not witnessed such violence in its over 50-year history as a state. The protests broke the myth of the Hasina Wajed government’s invincibility.

Within weeks, it turned into a mass uprising, breaking the hold of an authoritarian regime. It united all kinds of opposition forces that had been suppressed by the state. The events of the past weeks also exposed the fault lines in the system. It was an implosion waiting to happen. It just needed a trigger, which was provided by the student protests. The allocation of 30 per cent of government jobs to the families of ‘freedom fighters’ had been abolished following protests in 2018, but was restored this year. It was seen as a move to pack state institutions with Awami League loyalists.

It was not just political repression but also the rising cost of living that fuelled the unrest.

It was not just the political repression and worsening human rights situation, but also the rising cost of living and growing unemployment among the youth that fuelled the unrest. Not surprisingly, Gen Z has been at the vanguard of the movement that ultimately led Hasina Wajed to step down and flee the country.

Although Bangladesh has been one of the fastest-growing economies in the region over the past many years, the gap between the haves and have-nots has also widened there. Inflation, which touched double digits in recent months, has also fuelled discontent. All this sparked a powerful uprising against the regime.

Hasina Wajed entered politics after the assassination of her father and founder of Bangladesh, Sheikh Mujibur Rehman, in a military coup in 1975. She lived in exile in India for several years before returning to the country in 1981. She first became prime minister after her Awami League party swept the elections in 1996. But she lost the next election to her rival, Khaleda Zia. The two women dominated Bangladesh politics for several years.

Hasina won the 2008 elections, which took place after two years of a military-backed ‘technocratic government’. This phase marked her authoritarian grip over power. She jailed her opponents, including her main rival, Khaleda Zia. Her government executed many opposition leaders after dubious trials for being ‘collaborators’ during Bangladesh’s war of independence.

Her party won four successive elections, all marred by allegations of rigging. The last elections held in January this year were boycotted by the main opposition parties. It reportedly saw the lowest turnout of voters in the country’s history. Human Rights Watch said the country’s prisons were full of opposition activists arrested in a crackdown before the elections.

With virtually no presence of the opposition parties in parliament, it paved the way for a one-party system. The recent elections marked the beginning of the downfall of Hasina Wajed’s rule. What happened in Dhaka this week, with angry mobs ransacking the former prime minister’s residence and destroying statues of Mujibur Rehman, was a manifestation of the public rage against authoritarianism. The spectacle of uncontrolled mobs ruling the streets in the absence of any leadership has been alarming.

Notwithstanding the destruction of the democratic process, Bangladesh saw unprecedented economic growth during her rule. From a basket case, Bangladesh emerged as a model for Third World countries. The country also fared well in human development indicators. Yet, the economic slowdown of recent months and spiralling inflation raised questions about medium- and long-term economic prospects, adding to the social and political unrest.

Hasina Wajed’s rule saw Dhaka becoming very close to New Delhi. Her party’s association with it goes back to India’s role in the 1971 war. Hasina Wajed’s exile in India after the assassination of her father also brought her closer to the Indian leadership. But her pro-Indian stance drew criticism from the opposition, particularly the religious parties. In her ouster, New Delhi has lost a close regional ally.

The Bangladesh army, which has now taken control of the country, has a long history of coups. It had taken a back seat over the past 15 years or supported the Hasina Wajed government, but the current power vacuum pulled it into the role of arbiter. It will not be possible to impose military rule in the country now. It is highly doubtful that the people who fought against authoritarian rule by a political party will accept military dictatorship.

Another reason deterring a military takeover is the expected reaction from the international community, particularly the UN. Bangladesh is among the top contributors to UN peacekeeping forces. There’s a clear indication that the country could lose that position in case of a military takeover. It is now becoming increasingly clear that the military will back an interim government comprising technocrats. However, it remains to be seen if such an arrangement can work in the highly volatile situation.