Bangladesh Crisis: Sheikh Hasina’s death sentence by the puppet government in Dhaka led by Muhammad Yunus has forced Bangladesh into a period of deep introspection that is inextricably linked to the country’s turbulent political history.
In a country that has battled for fifty years to strike a delicate balance between political hostility and democratic aspirations, the ruling is more than just a legal conclusion; it is a profound political development. This is a difficult time for India as well, requiring patience, sobriety, and a unique degree of self-control.
The concept of Bangladesh itself is inextricably linked to Hasina’s story. She is the daughter of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, the legendary man who turned East Pakistan into an independent nation, thus she has always been more than just a political leader. Her life has developed at the nexus of extraordinary political perseverance and profound personal tragedy.
Therefore, the conviction for crimes against humanity resulting from the violent suppression of the student protests in 2024 is a very serious incident. The country’s moral fabric was damaged by the violence of those months, which resulted in hundreds of deaths and families left without answers.
Many were shocked that Hasina permitted such excesses given her lengthy tenure and political savvy. Some may find comfort in the fact that accountability has now been assigned by the judicial system. However, the trial’s opacity and pace have brought up some challenging issues of their own. Justice frequently treads carefully in unstable democracies; quick decisions can come across as biased, while slowness is perceived as weakness. Bangladesh is right on that edge.
The more unsettling aspects of the Hasina era, such as her relentless pursuit of political enemies and her willingness to use the entire might of the state in doing so, must also be addressed in light of this situation. Her protracted battle against Muhammad Yunus, who was now in charge of the interim administration, was the most notable example. Yunus is not your typical political foe. His groundbreaking work in microfinance revolutionized ideas about global development; the Grameen Bank gave millions of rural women their agency back; this revolutionary impact was acknowledged with the Nobel Peace Prize.
In contrast to Dhaka’s established political class, Yunus represented moral stature and inventiveness to a sizable portion of the global community. However, a number of investigations and prosecutions that many around the world believed to be politically motivated cornered him. For his supporters, this was more about intoleranceโa refusalย to accept other moral authority centersโthan it was about legality.
Bangladesh has made impressive social and economic advancements despite its political unpredictability. Unprecedented numbers of women have joined the workforce. Manufacturing has grown. Health metrics have significantly improved. A vibrant, ambitious society has frequently surpassed the political elite intended to lead it. The friction between a dynamic society and fragile political institutions is what gives the current crisis its disquieting undertone. It’s possible that the verdict against Hasina was meant to serve as a warning about accountability, but until the larger political culture shifts, accountability will devolve into retaliation.
Thus, the Awami League’s current state of confusion is consequential. It has been a key component of the nation’s political structure for many years, despite criticism of its governance. Its sudden displacement creates a vacuum, and in South Asia, vacuums rarely stay empty. They welcome players of all stripes, some democratic, others opportunistic, and yet others driven by long-suppressed ideological currents. Islamist organizations that were previously marginalized or suppressed are among the forces lurking on the periphery. Their comeback will jeopardize the security framework of the entire region in addition to destabilizing Bangladesh. India would be the first country to feel the tremors due to its long and porous border.
Through refugee flows, smuggling routes, or militant movements, political unrest in Bangladesh has frequently spilled over the border, according to history. Bangladesh’s state capability has improved, yet uncertainty still exists. India should exercise alertness without being overly alarmed at this time.
Under Hasina’s leadership, few neighbors have been more important to India’s security calculations than Bangladesh. India’s “Neighbourhood First” policy found its most dependable ally in Dhaka; borders were tranquil; counterterrorism collaboration reached previously unheard-of heights; and Northeastern rebel groups were refused sanctuary. New Delhi is in unfamiliar territory now that that anchor has been removed. Hasina has been given sanctuary by India, a decision based on geopolitical caution, historical affinity, and humanitarian duty.
India now has to tread a tightrope diplomatically as the new Dhaka government seeks her extradition: Strong enough to stand by its ruling, but cautious enough not to seem involved in the internal strife of another nation. Extradition is unimaginable. However, even a principled rejection needs to be accompanied by discretion, moderation, and unwavering diplomacy.
Also Read: Has India invaded Bangladesh?
Beneath these immediate concerns, however, is a more profound query: Can Bangladesh overcome its deeply ingrained political habits? Its politics have been molded by cycles of delegitimization for decades, with each opposition preparing to exact revenge for its losses and each government denouncing the previous one. Institutions are corroded by such patterns. They deprive a country of the civic patience, continuity, and memory necessary for robust democracies. Instead of being a common civic arena, politics turns into a battlefield.
Muhammad Yunus is currently in a position that could either solidify this culture or start to undermine it. For a long time, the preferences of the ruling party have influenced the bureaucracy and security organizations. In addition to administrative skill, unraveling those allegiances requires a moral breadth that is uncommon in transitional regimes. Political upheavals frequently result in haste that passes for wisdom. Purges are alluring. However, purges do not bring to national healing. They recover through dependable processes, reputable organizations, and a broad sense of national identity. Yunus will do what nearly every government has failed to do: a politics free from fear of the other if he can lead Bangladesh even a few steps toward such a future.
Bangladesh may become closer to Kazi Nazrul Islam’s vision of a Sonar Bangla, a golden kingdom rooted in possibility rather than resentment, if its leaders can now transcend the well-known customs of rivalry and retaliation.
