Nlantha Ilangamuwa

South Asia’s youngest nation has been thrust into a new era following a four-day power vacuum, decisively crossing a point of no return. A new messiah has emerged to rule over 171 million people, arriving from Paris in a full-circle moment.

Had Hasina remained in power, he would have been sentenced to life for corruption on the very day Hasina fled the country she had ruled for over 15 years.

Nobel laureate Muhammad Yunus has assumed the role of head of the interim government. A 14-member interim government including a Hindu psychiatrist and a Buddhist human rights activist led by Prof. Yunus has taken charge.

Alarmingly, most of these members are heads of Western-funded NGOs, exposing the true manipulators behind the scenes. It was a nightmare for them to run their NGOs during Hasina’s tenure, with many facing harassment, intimidation, and even imprisonment.

Now, they have set their yardstick. Nobel laureate Prof. Yunus, who has received the Congressional Gold Medal and the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the highest civilian honours in the United States, illustrates the adage that, as Americans say, there’s no such thing as a free lunch.

The coming months will reveal how Dhaka’s political shifts will reverberate across borders. Nearly 300 people have been killed in the post-Hasina period, with rampant looting, attacks on minorities, and intimidation of state institutions. Images show disturbing violence, including the burning of Hindu temples.

The riots go beyond protests against the Awami League, revealing deeper conflicts. Simultaneously, one should not overlook the deep-rooted anti-India sentiments in Bangladesh and its diaspora, exacerbated by the ‘India Out’ campaign. Unfortunately, Delhi policymakers may have underestimated this sentiment and placed undue trust in Hasina.

It was a bloodbath, and the incidents that unfolded suggest it was a well-planned political scheme, executed promptly to overthrow Hasina—a time-tested leader, though surrounded by controversies. The humiliating destruction of Bangabandhu’s statue starkly echoes the fall of Saddam Hussein’s statue in Baghdad.

Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, known as Bangabandhu, laid the foundation of Bangladesh with his political ideology and dedication during the struggle for independence.

Despite overcoming initial challenges, fear has once again taken hold in the country. The chaotic situation exemplifies a state of total anarchy. This is not a revolution; revolutions are meant to improve the lives of people, not to indulge in bloodlust against unarmed citizens with opposing political viewpoints or religious beliefs.

However, given the nation’s violent history even before its inception, it seems to be passing through yet another despicable period.

Is this merely a student uprising, or is someone manipulating them behind the scenes to exploit the situation? When the political intelligentsia abstains from protests, reducing them to mere emotional outbursts, it fosters an environment ripe for the creation of new, equally monstrous situations.

This cycle will inevitably doom us to repeat the same failures.The harrowing video of an unemployed youth wearing a black t-shirt being shot by a policeman only deepened the unrest. Hasina bears blood on her hands; whether directly or through those who ordered lethal force against protesters, accountability is imperative.

Thanks to India, Hasina narrowly escaped a fate akin to Muammar Gaddafi’s. In the January elections, she set a trap with her abuse of power and legislative misogyny, even denying medical treatment to opponents.

Her opponents seized on the quota issue as the tipping point. Although she addressed it, she failed to recognise it was merely a façade. Her inability to understand that 15 years is too long for any democracy to be managed alone highlights a grim historical lesson.

However, history teaches us a valuable lesson: despite Ferdinand Marcos’ ousting, his family’s influence persisted, and in 2021, his son made a notable comeback in the Philippines. That’s the nature of politics. Consequently, whoever comes to power next will face a challenging situation.

The manipulations behind these shocking events, which unfolded within a month while the Prime Minister was in China, may be revealed in the future, much like how America tried to obscure the genocide in Bangladesh (then East Pakistan) during the early 60s, with Henry Kissinger maintaining a political alliance with General Yahya Khan of Pakistan as a secret route to engage with China.

Commenting on the situation, Secretary of State Antony Blinken, reflecting his country’s global ambitions, urged the Bangladeshi people to ensure that ‘any decisions made by the interim government need to respect democratic principles, uphold the rule of law, and reflect the will of the people.’

This statement came shortly after the arrival of F-16 fighter jets in Ukraine, continued arms supplies to Israel, and the brutal killing of Black woman Sonya Massey by law enforcement in her own home—just a few examples that highlight the contradictions in America’s respect for the rule of law and international norms.

Ironically, many have started comparing the situation in Bangladesh with Sri Lanka. However, there are significant differences between the unprecedented exit of the Bangladeshi Prime Minister this week and the relinquishment of power by President Gotabaya Rajapaksa in Sri Lanka two years ago. One key factor was India’s attitude, which was drastically different in these cases.

Reliable sources with knowledge of the events in Sri Lanka have asserted that India believed Gotabaya Rajapaksa should not resign but should stay in power. This stance resulted in no airlift facilities being provided for a safe exit, forcing the then-President to flee to the Maldives in an over-50-year-old Air Force plane. 

In contrast, Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina of Bangladesh received swift support from India. Second, Gotabaya Rajapaksa came to power through free and fair elections with a significant majority, whereas Sheikh Hasina was re-elected after a series of repressions against opposition political parties.

Her handling of the elections reflected growing public displeasure. Winning over regional powers and maintaining their support certainly made her powerful and influential.

Her development projects offered to India, China, Russia, and Japan highlighted bold decisions in her foreign policy. She effectively balanced both India and China, showcasing her capability more effectively than any other South Asian leader in contemporary political history.

However, a common trait between these two leaders is their stance on China. Despite unprecedented pressure from the West, both leaders continued to work harmoniously with China.

For instance, when Mike Pompeo, then Secretary of State and former CIA Director, criticised China during his visit to Colombo, President Rajapaksa directly told him that “the opinion held by America against China in Sri Lanka is factually wrong.” Since then, Rajapaksa’s politics began to crumble, pointing to the decisions he made and the protests that followed.

Similarly, after successfully concluding a visit to India right after Modi’s re-election, Hasina flew to China to initiate more Chinese-funded development projects. By then, her fate at home was already sealed.In this context, Elon Musk’s recent comment on Venezuela is apt: ‘We will coup whoever we want! Deal with it.’

Amidst the social media spectacle dominated by profit-driven motives and emotionally manipulative politics, the unemployed youth who ignited change in Bangladesh may soon face this harsh reality. 

Western ambitions in unstable countries often focus on destruction and manipulation through proxies rather than genuine improvements in livelihoods. The new interim government may well understand this realpolitik.

With Hasina’s downfall, the direction of the interim government’s foreign policy and its approach towards the Global South, including BRICS, remains uncertain. While it may be premature to fully assess this interim arrangement, the situation poses a significant challenge for India, China, and Asia as a whole.

 (The writer is a journalist and author. Views expressed are personal)