By Dipak Kurmi
The political landscape of Bangladesh is undergoing a seismic transformation, fraught with chaos, violence, and shifting global allegiances. The turbulence following Sheikh Hasina’s exile and the escalating lawlessness in Dhaka mark a critical juncture in the nation’s history. The unfolding events, set against the backdrop of historical alliances and recent geopolitical shifts, suggest that Bangladesh is entering an unpredictable phase—one that could have far-reaching consequences for both its internal stability and its international relationships.
In the aftermath of Sheikh Hasina’s virtual address to her supporters from a location near Delhi, Dhaka erupted into mayhem. The opposition seized the opportunity to unleash its fury, leading to the burning of the historic 32 Dhanmondi residence of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman and a museum dedicated to his legacy. The attack symbolized not just political dissent but an attempt to erase the physical manifestations of Mujib’s influence in Bangladesh’s political fabric. Despite the destruction, Hasina defiantly declared, “History cannot be wiped out.” However, the reality on the ground tells a different story—Mujib’s legacy has never been more vulnerable.
Mahfuz Alam, a student advisor to the interim government led by Nobel laureate Mohammad Yunus, asserted that these actions were part of a movement to dismantle symbols of “fascism.” Surprisingly, the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP), traditionally at odds with the Awami League, condemned the violence. BNP Secretary General Faqrul Aslam Alamgir not only called for early elections but also urged India to extradite Hasina and her associates to Bangladesh for trial. Such an appeal underscores the deepening rift between India and Bangladesh’s new power structure.
The Bangladesh Army Chief, General Waker-Uz-Zaman, weighed in on the turmoil, warning that the deteriorating law and order situation was a threat to national stability. Notably, his comments also reflected a recalibration of Dhaka’s foreign policy. He emphasized the importance of maintaining good relations with India, recognizing the geographical and strategic inevitability of cooperation. India, for its part, labeled the violence as “regrettable,” prompting Dhaka to summon the Indian High Commissioner—a move that signaled an emerging diplomatic rift.
Despite diplomatic overtures such as Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri’s visit to Dhaka and External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar’s meeting with Bangladeshi officials in Muscat, relations between the two nations are expected to worsen before they improve. A fundamental shift in Bangladesh’s power dynamics appears inevitable, mirroring Nepal’s transformation following its decade-long civil war. The face of Bangladesh, once shaped by Mujib and his ideological successors, is being redrawn, and the forces behind this change are far from subtle.
A key point of contention remains the alleged involvement of the United States in Hasina’s ouster. Accusations of a “color revolution” orchestrated by American deep-state actors under the Biden administration have circulated widely. However, Lisa Curtis, former White House National Security Council chief for South and Central Asia under Trump, dismissed any U.S. role in the events. In a recent conversation between Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and former U.S. President Donald Trump, the latter also denied any American involvement. Yet, the political calculus in New Delhi suggests otherwise.
India has historically supported the Awami League due to its shared history with the liberation struggle of 1971. Following Mujib’s assassination in 1975, India provided refuge to Hasina and her sister Rehana, a favor that was repeated in 2024. The Indian establishment’s reluctance to abandon Hasina, despite shifting political winds, raises critical questions about its strategic foresight. Intelligence assessments seemingly failed to gauge the depth of anti-Hasina sentiment, resulting in an unexpected student-led revolt that toppled her government.
During a visit to Bangladesh in November 2023, just two months before the elections, I witnessed firsthand the shifting political sentiments. At the Liberation War Museum, a section dedicated to Mujib’s struggle against Rawalpindi portrayed the war as a largely Bengali endeavor, with India playing a secondary role. While the Mukti Bahini’s collaboration with the Indian Army was acknowledged, the museum’s narrative suggested a diminishing recognition of India’s role in Bangladesh’s independence. This shift in historical memory reflects the broader political realignment underway in Dhaka.
On the streets of Dhaka, BNP supporters, garment factory workers, and union members staged relentless protests, calling for higher wages and democratic reforms. The Awami League, in turn, responded with its own counter-protests. Conversations with diplomats and local citizens revealed a near-unanimous belief that a free and fair election would have resulted in a BNP victory. The dissatisfaction with India’s unwavering support for Hasina was palpable, and the media, operating under state pressure, hesitated to openly criticize the government.
Perhaps the most striking realization from my visit was that India’s goodwill dividend from the 1971 war had long expired. The generation that had lived through the war had faded from both the Indian and Bangladeshi armed forces. The perception in Dhaka was clear—India was merely an ally in the struggle, not the decisive force behind liberation. This sentiment was publicly reinforced by Arif Nazrul, law advisor to the Yunus administration, who stated unequivocally: “India was only an ally in the 1971 war victory, nothing more.”
With Hasina’s political exile fueling resentment against India, New Delhi faces difficult choices. Bangladesh is not the first neighboring nation where India has provided sanctuary to embattled leaders—Nepal, Afghanistan, Myanmar, and the Maldives have all seen similar interventions. However, sheltering Hasina comes with unique risks. The emerging power structure in Dhaka, increasingly influenced by the BNP and Islamist factions, is unlikely to forget or forgive India’s involvement.
As Bangladesh hurtles towards an uncertain future, its domestic upheaval is bound to have regional implications. The forthcoming elections, if held, will determine the nation’s trajectory. Will the Awami League be allowed to participate? Will political violence escalate? Will Bangladesh’s new leadership seek reconciliation with India or double down on anti-India rhetoric? These questions remain unanswered. One thing, however, is certain—Bangladesh is changing, and the consequences will reverberate across South Asia for years to come.
(the writer can be reached at dipakkurmiglpltd@gmail.com)
