The recent protests that rocked Bangladesh were not only in opposition to a controversial quota system for government jobs but also reflect a backlash against Bangladesh Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina’s approach to power: absolute, aloof, and privileged.
The Hasina government’s violent suppression of the protest, which led to the deaths of nearly 200 people — mostly students and common people — marks the greatest challenge to her control over power yet, occurring shortly after she secured a fourth consecutive term as prime minister in a landslide victory amid a flawed election.
Protests in 2018 pressured Hasina to abolish the quota system, replacing it with a merit-based selection process. However, in June of this year, courts perceived to be aligned with Hasina reinstated the old quota system.
This move was widely interpreted as an effort to appease her political base, particularly in light of economic constraints limiting other avenues of support.
Responding to this perceived injustice, university students and recent graduates took to the streets in early July to voice their opposition to the High Court verdict. Analysts attribute the recent outbreak of violence to Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina’s forceful handling of what were initially peaceful protests.
Government forces and vigilantes aligned with the ruling party aggressively suppressed demonstrations against the job quotas, leading to widespread turmoil. The imposition of a military curfew, restrictions on communication, and mass arrests intensified the crisis to a critical level.
This crackdown, unprecedented in recent decades, has sparked outrage and horror among Bangladeshis. The official death toll, believed to be an underestimate, is already nearing 200, while protest leaders fear a far higher number. The extensive loss of life has crossed a line for many, fueling ongoing anger and unrest.
To crush the protests, Hasina mobilized all available forces onto the streets, including a feared paramilitary unit whose leaders have previously faced international sanctions for allegations of torture, extrajudicial killings, and enforced disappearances.
The army, once prone to staging coups but now under Hasina’s control, has also been deployed alongside law enforcement agencies accused by her critics of acting excessively to extend her authority.
In response to the violent crackdown, a group of foreign ambassadors met with Bangladesh’s foreign minister to express concern. According to a senior diplomat familiar with the discussions, they raised issues about the use of helicopters and vehicles belonging to United Nations peacekeepers by Bangladesh’s security forces in their operations against student protesters.
On Thursday, Dhaka, the capital city, continued to face shortages of essential supplies due to the curfew impeding transportation. Prices of necessities, particularly vegetables, nearly doubled, prompting long queues at electricity and gas offices as the internet shutdown prevented people from recharging their prepaid meters.
Analysts say the government is trying to shift the narrative from “death tolls” to economic loss which they attribute to the main political opposition parties — the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) and the Jamaat-E-Islami — “hijacking” the protest from the students and steering it to suit their own political interests of destabilizing the country, wreaking havoc and toppling the government.
“Yes, the government’s image in front of the world was marred due to the forceful suppression of the student movement,” admitted Mahbubul Alam Hanif, the joint secretary general of the ruling Awami League, “But we had no choice but to take action against troublemakers aiming to destabilize the country and overthrow an elected government.”
In an interview with The Diplomat, Hanif dismissed the claim that those killed in the violence were students, instead identifying them as armed members of BNP-Jamaat engaged in vandalizing public property. “Those who targeted law enforcement personnel cannot be considered students; they are terrorists,” he said. “The police aimed at the terrorists, not the students.”
However, political analyst Zahed Ur Rahman expressed a contrasting view. The ruling party’s strategy of blaming BNP-Jamaat for all issues may no longer be effective. “Their habit of attributing their own wrongdoings to the political opposition has become akin to the tiger and shepherd story. Few rational individuals in Bangladesh believe that anymore,” he told The Diplomat.
The government also tried to justify the internet blackout as necessary to prevent the spread of misinformation, but it has also obscured the full extent of the violence. Grainy cell phone videos that have emerged depict security forces aiming and firing at protesters, as well as callously discarding bodies on the streets.
“It was a misstep for the government to purportedly impose a communication blackout, despite their denial,” remarked Badiul Alam Majumder, a prominent figure in Bangladesh’s civil society who leads the civic rights organization, Shujan. Majumder told The Diplomat that “this not only escalated anger, speculation, and misinformation but also tarnished the government’s reputation on the global stage. The government’s heavy-handed response to quelling a student-led protest is unprecedented, and no blackout can sufficiently conceal it.”
Meanwhile, the protesters, currently dispersed, have vowed to regroup if their demands are not addressed. Some factions argue that the movement has transcended concerns about quotas to become a quest for justice for those who lost their lives.
One group has issued a nine-point set of demands, including an apology from Hasina and the resignation of certain key aides.
Nahid Islam, a leader among the protesters who claimed to have been subjected to blindfolding and torture by law enforcement, asserted that negotiations would not proceed until the “communication blackout was lifted and security forces withdrew from university campuses.”
“Several of our fellow protesters were also abducted by plain-clothed police,” Islam told The Diplomat. “If this pattern of torture and intimidation persists, how can we trust that calling off the protests will not lead to further repression?”