But I shall never forget my people, especially at a time when the rise of extremist ideologies and violent political and religious persecution puts Bangladesh at serious risk of a period of decline from which it will take many years to recover.

Recently, the unelected Interim Government of Bangladesh, headed by Muhammad Yunus, announced that elections would be held on February 12th, 2026. The country’s largest secular political party, Awami League however, has been eliminated from the political process through violent persecution – including numerous lynchings, unjust imprisonment and torture – and arbitrary administrative measures.

This troubling chaos and political vacuum has given extremist political parties with a fanatical religious ideology – the Jamaat-e-Islami in particular – free rein to assume power, in the absence of a secular counterpart that historically stood against and prevented its rise. This alarming situation will inevitably give rise to years of instability and serious threats to regional security. It is imperative that the international community, and the United States in particular, ensure that any elections are free, fair, and all-inclusive.

As many human rights organizations have reported, since the overthrow of the constitutional government in August 2024, there have been numerous violent attacks against Hindu, Christian, Buddhist, and other religious minorities and their places of worship. These reports document patterns of collective punishment in districts associated with secular and opposition political parties, and districts with a sizable minority population.

Several opposition political figures, including myself, have been sentenced to death in widely-condemned trials before the International Crimes Tribunal of Bangladesh, and there is a serious fear that arbitrary executions may follow.

Ironically, the Tribunal was created in 1973 to prosecute the collaborators who assisted the Pakistani army in the genocide during the 1971 War of Independence under the leadership of my father Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, during which some 3 million Bangladeshi civilians were murdered and countless women and girls became victims of horrific sexual violence. These are the same political forces that are now seeking a come-back with the apparent support of the Interim Government.

When I was elected in 2008, Bangladesh was a hotbed of extremist forces and terrorism. In its tenure of 16 years, my government worked, under enormous pressure, to keep these fanatical movements contained and to protect the secular constitution of the country.

As a result, Bangladesh saw long periods of stability and unprecedented economic prosperity that witnessed an astonishing 500% increase in per capita GDP, lifting millions out of poverty. This progress was achieved against the backdrop of several plots to assassinate myself and my sole surviving family member, my sister Sheikh Rehana. All of our parents and siblings, including our 10-year old brother, were murdered in cold blood in 1975 by the same political forces that are today seeking power.

Extremist ideologies rarely vanish; they wait for opportunities created by political exclusion, institutional weakening and social fear. Today, all of the guardrails that once constrained them have started to crumble. But I have arisen from this valley of death before and will do so again, with one conviction: that it is my sacred duty to protect the democratic rights of Bangladesh and to promote the dignity of its people. I will continue to stand for this struggle no matter who tries to silence me.

Invariably, during this period of extraordinary prosperity, mistakes were also made, and there are many lessons to be learned on the historical path of progress. In particular, during 2024, amidst a campaign of hate propaganda, misinformation and violent insurrection, numerous protestors and police officers were killed.

I had immediately ordered an impartial inquiry to establish responsibility for these tragic deaths, which the Interim Government has abandoned in favour of politicized sham trials and death sentences, while at the same time offering immunity to those who instigated the violence. The purpose of the agitators was simply the unconstitutional overthrow of the Government, which resulted in my exile to India on August 5th, 2024, and the current predicament.

But I shall never forget my people, especially at a time when the rise of extremist ideologies and violent political and religious persecution puts Bangladesh at serious risk of a period of decline from which it will take many years to recover.

The exclusion of the secular Awami League from forthcoming elections is inextricably tied to the rise of extremists, who present a dire threat not only to the people of Bangladesh, but also to the United States and its allies, as a once stable, secular, and prosperous country descends into a source of perpetual instability, decline and terrorism.

Bangladesh, with a population of 170 million, is situated in a vital strategic region, at the centre of the Bay of Bengal, between India and Myanmar. If it falls in the hands of extremists and their global network, its fallout will carry consequences far beyond its borders.

Disclaimer: Views expressed by writers in this section are their own and do not reflect Milli Chronicle’s point-of-view.

In an exclusive email interview, former Bangladesh Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina speaks to The Milli Chronicle about the violent turn of the 2024 protests that led to her departure, failure of Yunus-led interim government, and her concerns over extremism, democratic legitimacy, and Bangladesh’s political and strategic future.

Question: Could you share what factors influenced your decision to leave Bangladesh, and what assurances you would need to consider returning?

Answer: What began as a genuine student movement was escalated by radicalists who led the crowds into violence, destroying state and communications infrastructure and burning down police stations. By then, this was no longer a peaceful civic movement, but a violent mob.

My instinct has always been to protect our country and our citizens, and it was not an easy decision to leave while my country erupted into lawlessness. I regret that I was compelled to leave, but it was a decision I took to minimize any further loss of life, and to ensure the safety of people around me.

For me to return, Bangladesh must restore constitutional governance and the rule of law. This means lifting the unlawful ban on the Awami League, releasing political prisoners detained on fabricated charges, and holding genuinely free elections. You cannot claim democratic legitimacy while banning the party elected nine times by the people.

Question: How do you reflect on your government’s handling of the 2024 protests, and how do you respond to the concerns raised about the use of force and the legal cases that followed?

Answer: In the initial days, we allowed students to protest freely and accepted their demands. Then extremists transformed peaceful demonstrations into a violent insurrection. We responded as any government would when faced with burning police stations and attacks on state infrastructure; we acted to restore order and to prevent further bloodshed.

I attempted to gain a full picture of the events in August 2024 by establishing a judicial inquiry commission to investigate every death. The conspiracy behind these attacks became clear only later when Yunus immediately dissolved this inquiry, released convicted terrorists, and granted blanket immunity to those he now glorifies as ‘July Warriors.’ These same actors marched on the Indian embassy last week, no doubt emboldened by the protection of the interim government.

If there were genuine concerns about excessive force or wrongful prosecutions, why destroy the very mechanism designed to investigate them? The truth is that Yunus has consistently thwarted attempts to establish what really happened in July and August 2024, because an impartial investigation would reveal the orchestrated nature of the violence.

Question: What is your assessment of the current Yunus-led regime, and how do you view Bangladesh’s future—both with the proposed February 2026 elections and in the longer term?

Answer: We cannot forget that Yunus governs without a single vote from the Bangladeshi people. He has placed extremists in cabinet positions, released convicted terrorists, and done little or nothing to stop attacks on religious minorities. The economy that quadrupled during my tenure is now stalling.

Yunus came to power promising reform yet all he has sown division and banned the country’s oldest and most popular political party, thus disenfranchising millions. These elections can never be legitimate if the Awami League is banned.

My concern is that extremists are using Yunus to project an acceptable international face while they radicalise our institutions domestically. But Bangladesh and its people have extraordinary resilience and an unwavering belief in the power of participatory democracy. I trust that democracy will prevail and that we will set our great country back on the path to recovery and growth.

Question: Looking back, how do you view the debate over democratic space during your tenure, and what reforms or new approaches would you prioritize if given another opportunity to lead?

Answer: I believe our greatest achievement as a party was the restoration of democracy in the 1990s. When I returned to Bangladesh following my father’s assassination, the biggest challenge facing our country was a lack of popular representation. Those years of military rule and unelected leadership taught us valuable lessons about the power of democracy that we never took for granted during our time in government. As a government, we encouraged political engagement and participation across the nation. Democracy thrives with healthy opposition, yet some of those parties chose to boycott previous elections, restricting the democratic choice of millions of ordinary citizens.

It is interesting that those who accused us of restricting democratic space now rule without a single vote, have forced judges to resign, and have detained journalists brave enough to critique their increasingly authoritarian grip on our nation. The question isn’t what reforms I would implement, it’s whether Bangladesh will retain any democratic institutions to reform.

We are proud of our record in government. During those 15 years, we helped to lift millions out of poverty, empowered women, and transformed Bangladesh into one of Asia’s fastest-growing economies. We consistently protected the rights of minorities and prevented radicalism from eroding our democracy. It takes a legitimate and strong government to forge our country’s place both domestically and internationally, and we did so by operating within constitutional boundaries. We were repeatedly mandated by voters at the ballot box.

Question: How do you assess the country’s current political course under the interim government, particularly in terms of national stability and long-term strategic interests?

Answer: The Yunus government took power with a wave of western support from those who confused economic success with political aptitude. Reality has now set in. International bodies condemn his actions, cabinet members have stepped down in protest, and our citizens face unprecedented danger. Hundreds of innocent people have been detained arbitrarily under Yunus and journalists have been censored.

On the international stage, decades of carefully cultivated economic partnerships and regional stability have also been jeopardised.

This goes beyond mere incompetence; it is the systemic destruction of a once-stable country. Thankfully, such regimes never endure, and Yunus’ treatment of Bangladesh as his personal experiment will soon end. I can only hope that the international community will do its part in ensuring free, fair and participatory elections, so that the next legitimately elected government can rebuild what Yunus and his cronies have destroyed.

Question: Since your departure, Pakistan’s outreach and influence in Bangladesh appears to have grown. How do you think Bangladesh can balance evolving regional relationships while preserving its historical commitments, security priorities, and ties with India?

Answer: Bangladesh requires stable relationships with all neighbours, including Pakistan. But Yunus’ rushed embrace of Pakistan, which has never acknowledged the genocide of 1971, reveals a desperate search for any international validation.

The fundamental issue is legitimacy: Yunus lacks any mandate to realign our foreign policy. Strategic decisions that could affect generations should not be made by an unelected administration serving ideological interests. Once Bangladeshis can vote freely and we have a legitimate government in place, I hope that our foreign policy will once again be based on sober and pragmatic assessments of the country’s national interests.

Excerpts from this interview may be reproduced or quoted, provided that The Milli Chronicle is clearly credited as the source.

Hyenas of the defeated forces of 1971 now roam unchallenged.

A medieval darkness has descended upon the sacred land of independent Bangladesh. Law and order lie in shambles. Robbery and organised plunder now stain towns and villages alike. The nation stands captured by anti-Bangladesh forces—those who once trembled before the ideals of 1971 but now strut shamelessly across the land in this grim interregnum.

The illegal and unconstitutional “Interim Government” led by Prof. Dr. Muhammad Yunus has exposed its moral bankruptcy by failing to safeguard the sanctity of our national icons—Bangabandhu Memorial Museum, his murals, his statues, and the homes and temples of our religious minorities, especially the Hindu community.

Hyenas of the defeated forces of 1971 now roam unchallenged. Bangladesh has been thrust into the hands of the very criminals and collaborators whom history had once consigned to disgrace.

Let us be absolutely clear: Sheikh Hasina’s fall did not occur because of a student-led anti-quota movement. That movement was merely the surface ripple concealing a deep and treacherous undercurrent. From the very beginning, the unrest was a meticulously crafted pretext—a multilayered, billion-dollar blueprint engineered by a powerful Western intelligence agency acting in close concert with its local henchmen.

Among these were Dr. Yunus, long a favoured protégé of foreign powers; the Jamaat-BNP nexus; the Pakistani ISI; extremist right-wing Islamist networks; an ambitious army chief and his loyal cabal; and even the strategic manipulations of the Chinese dragon. Together, this unholy coalition executed a hawk-eyed operation to unseat Sheikh Hasina through an unlawful coup on 5 August 2024.

The objective of this foreign power was as brazen as it was sinister: to compel Bangladesh to surrender Saint Martin’s Island. Situated in the northeastern Bay of Bengal, the island offers unparalleled strategic advantage over Southeast Asia and the broader Indo-Pacific. Sheikh Hasina, steadfast and patriotic, refused to reduce Bangladesh to a tributary state by allowing the establishment of a foreign military base.

For this refusal, she was removed.

What followed her ousting exposed the true barbarism of the conspirators. Looting, arson, temple desecration, forced occupation of minority homes, and unchecked violence swept across the nation with an intensity unseen in decades.

The perpetrators were not faceless; they were the same elements who opposed the Liberation War in 1971—Jamaat-e-Islami mass-murderers, their Shibir offspring, extremist mullahs, and various mercenary groups driven by religious bigotry and political vengeance.

On television, I witnessed scenes that seared my soul: a Hindu girl being dragged away by bearded zealots in a van while her father ran behind, crying in desperation; mobs of students—many naïve, many manipulated—raiding Sheikh Hasina’s home and proudly displaying stolen sarees before TV cameras; thugs parading items looted from the Prime Minister’s residence as if these were trophies of national triumph.

These were not acts of rebellion; they were acts of savagery.

And then came the final abomination: the attack on Bangabandhu’s historic home at Dhanmondi 32—the lighthouse of our national identity. What kind of nation allows the house of its founding father to be desecrated? What kind of creatures tear apart the very symbols of their own freedom?

These hellish beings sought not only to erase Sheikh Hasina’s legacy but to wipe out every sign of the Awami League’s monumental development achievement—bridges, highways, mega-projects, and the billions of dollars invested for the people’s welfare.

The “Interim Government” formed on 8 August 2024—under the shadow of guns and the blessing of foreign manipulators—had no constitutional basis. It was a grotesque aberration led by an octogenarian whose own judicial record is marred by convictions for labour law violations. Yet he postured as a saviour while presiding over the country’s descent into ruin.

Russia had warned us. On 15 December 2020, and again in 2023, Moscow publicly stated that a certain Western power intended to topple Sheikh Hasina if she returned to power. They predicted an Arab-Spring-style operation—one centred on university students, amplified by media propaganda, and lubricated by covert funding.

The children of this country—who never saw 1971, who do not know the long, treacherous shadow of the U.S.-Pakistani conspiracy behind Bangabandhu’s assassination—walked blindly into a geopolitical minefield. One day, they will look back in regret, realising they were pawns in a far greater game. By then, the damage may be irreversible.

Why were the verdicts timed as they were? Why did certain newspapers and television channels give extraordinary coverage from the very first hour? Who coordinated the protests? Who supplied funds, food, and logistics? Who weaponised social media? Who reaped the benefits? These questions answer themselves.

Most critically: Sheikh Hasina has not resigned. She remains the lawfully elected and rightful Prime Minister of Bangladesh. Her removal was effected at gunpoint—by an unworthy army chief and his mango-twigs, acting under the directives of foreign masters and their local Islamist proxies.

Today, Bangladesh is being forced toward a Hamas-ISIS styled banana republic, a grotesque distortion of the secular, democratic state for which we fought in 1971.

As a frontline Freedom Fighter who witnessed the brutal birth of Bangladesh with my own eyes, I pledge—until my final breath—to proclaim: Joy Bangla, Joy Bangabandhu, and Joytu Sheikh Hasina. Bangladesh awaits her return. And return she shall.

Disclaimer: Views expressed by writers in this section are their own and do not reflect Milli Chronicle’s point-of-view.

In a cruel twist of fate, the criminals’ progeny now don the robes of righteousness while the true patriots stand accused.

In the dismal theatre of Bangladesh’s recent political tragedy, a new act of deception unfolds. Draped in the solemn garb of justice but driven by blood-soaked ambitions, the International Crimes Tribunal (ICT) Bangladesh now stands as a grotesque caricature of its former purpose.

The very institution once designed to mete out justice for the heinous atrocities of 1971 has been infiltrated—occupied—by those whose ideological ancestors – Jamaat-e-Islami mass-murderers bathed this soil in the blood of innocents.

Today, the hangman wears a wig, and justice lies gagged beneath his boot.

The ICT Bangladesh, once hailed as a beacon of national redemption, is now but a blighted husk—a sanctimonious facade controlled by those who once sought to crush the very birth of Bangladesh in 1971. Its judges, its prosecution panel, and its operatives are no longer guardians of truth. They are, in many cases, ideological descendants or direct cronies of the very Jamaat-e-Islami mass murderers who collaborated with the Pakistani army to massacre our people in 1971.

This is no idle allegation. It is a scream from the soul of a wounded nation. How did the butchers of Al-Badr and Al-Shams—the enforcers of genocide—regain the power to adjudicate truth and fiction? How dare they now point a crooked finger at the very architects of our liberation?

Those who once carried the green flag of Pakistan into our neighborhoods, who torched our villages, raped our mothers, and hanged our fathers, now sit in judgment over HPM Sheikh Hasina—the daughter of our founding father—and the Awami League stalwarts who carried the torch of independence through blood and fire.

The July–August 2024 events in Bangladesh—twisted into a grotesque narrative of state-led genocide—are being weaponized by these impostors. 98% murders were committed by the Jamaat-Shibir butchers and their direful mango-twigs! But they have now seized the ICT Bangladesh as their instrument, not of justice, but of revenge. They seek to rewrite history, to humiliate the legacy of 1971, to exonerate the traitors and criminalize the freedom fighters.

This is a blasphemy of the highest order.

The tribunals have become kangaroo courts where truth is the first casualty. The prosecutors do not seek justice; they seek retribution for the defeat their fathers suffered in 1971. The judges do not interpret the law; they distort it, drape it around the gallows they build for patriots. These are not courts of law. They are execution chambers for history itself.

Let us remind these usurpers: HPM Sheikh Hasina’s government did not commit genocide in July–August 2024. Her government sought to preserve order when chaos was unleashed by foreign-backed infiltrators, aided by the very ideological heirs of Jamaat-e-Islami.

The arson, sabotage, and killings were not orchestrated by the state, but by a coalition of dark forces determined to unseat the legitimate government and restore the regime of direful collaborators.

Let there be no confusion—this is not merely a judicial matter. It is an existential crisis. The ICT Bangladesh has mutated into a Trojan horse of the Jamaati-Shibir nexus. Its continued existence in this form is a mockery of every martyr who bled on the soil of Bengal for freedom. The very men who once branded the war of 1971 as “haram” and pledged allegiance to the occupying Pakistani forces are now masquerading as custodians of justice.

How far have we fallen when the freedom fighters must plead their innocence before the ideological descendants of their oppressors?

In courtrooms darkened by deceit, verdicts are preordained. The hallowed robes of justice are smeared with the filth of hypocrisy. And those who cry for a fair trial for Sheikh Hasina and her colleagues are dismissed, vilified, and condemned.

Yet it is the nation that must rise.

We must speak not just as citizens, but as inheritors of a sacred cause. We must rise in unison against this vile masquerade of justice. We must denounce the ICT Bangladesh for what it has become—a collaborator’s tribunal, a platform for vengeance, a stage for the desecration of our liberation war.

The institutions that betray the soul of a nation have no right to exist.

It is, therefore, imperative that ICT Bangladesh in designedly the current form be disbanded—tout de suite. Its structure, infiltrated by Jamaati sympathizers, has lost all credibility. Its verdicts are poisoned, its judges compromised, its mission perverted. The house must be torn down, brick by brick, and a new temple of justice must be built upon its ashes—one that honors the martyrs, that reveres the truth, and that punishes the real criminals of our blood-stained past.

This is not merely a political stance. It is a moral imperative.

Let us revisit the history these court jesters now seek to erase. In 1971, over three million of our people were butchered. Over three hundred thousand women were raped. The killers were not nameless shadows—they wore uniforms provided by Pakistan and were guided by the murderous hands of Jamaat-e-Islami and their Al-Badr militias. They swore to crush the dream of Bangladesh. They failed—because brave men and women stood tall, among them Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, his true-blue lieutenants and his indomitable daughter HPM Sheikh Hasina.

And now, fifty-four years later, we see the grotesque irony of history: the children of those butchers deciding the fate of those who built this nation.

No! A thousand times, no!

We cannot allow this to continue. We must name the imposter judges. We must unmask the collaborators in prosecutor’s clothing. We must confront every verdict that reeks of vengeance and vendetta. The ICT Bangladesh, as it stands today, is a dagger in the back of our history. It has become a safehouse for the ideological murderers of 1971.

If we stay silent, we become complicit.

This is the hour to rise—not with arms, but with truth. Not with blood, but with remembrance. Let every Bangladesh’s people who still feels the heartbeat of 1971 throb in their veins raise their voice. Let the youth know that justice is not a costume, that truth cannot be handed over to traitors, that history must be defended.

Sheikh Hasina is not on trial. Bangladesh is.

This tribunal is not about the past. It is a cold war for the future.

Do not allow the hangman’s wig to fool you. Beneath it is the same rotting head that once declared our liberation illegal, our flag a provocation, our language a blasphemy.

Disband ICT Bangladesh as it is twisted now to serve their evil designs. Root out the Jamaati infestation. Purge the judiciary of traitors. Let the nation reclaim the moral compass of 1971.

And to those who sit in judgment today—be warned. The people of Bangladesh are not blind. The river of our memory runs deep. And when justice returns, as it must, it will not be cloaked in hypocrisy. It will come roaring like a storm, not to hang patriots, but to redeem them.

History does not forget.

And neither shall we. A vile masquerade of justice – The International Crimes Tribunal, Bangladesh beneath Jamaati-Shibir butchers’ cloak.

Sheikh Hasina made significant strides toward advancing women’s economic empowerment, yet her efforts were ultimately overshadowed by the rapid growth of religious mobilization.

Sheikh Hasina. There’s a name that echoes in every conversation about women’s rights in Bangladesh. Awards? She’s got a shelf full of them. Global Women’s Leadership, UN’s ‘Planet 50-50 Champion’, Agent of Change. Sheikh Hasina, as one of the world’s longest serving female prime ministers, clearly merits recognition for her significant contributions to the economic empowerment of women. 

Barrister Mohibul Hossain Chowdhury Nowfel, the education minister at Sheikh Hasina’s cabinet, recently discussed a significant social development on the A Team podcast. He observed a direct correlation between the increase in women entering the garment industry and the proliferation of madrassa enrolments nationwide. For working mothers, this arrangement offers reassurance that their children are both safe and receiving an affordable education grounded in religious values during their long work hours.

When opposites correlate

What does all this glitter mean for the women sweating it out on the factory floors? I’m talking about the women stitching your next fast-fashion impulse buy. Factories across the country are crammed with mothers, daughters, wives. More women than ever are out there, hustling, earning, sometimes even outearning the men at home. While these women are bent over sewing machines, churning out clothes for the global market, who’s taking care of their kids? Affordable Childcare? Support? Most days, it’s a patchwork of neighbours, older siblings, or just pure luck. No number of shiny plaques can stitch up that hole.

Over half the parents out there, especially moms, ‘No babysitter, no job’. Simple as that. Some women just gave up working altogether. Others said “no thanks” to jobs they wanted. There really wasn’t much choice, honestly. Single moms? Even tougher. And if both folks at home had to work, forget it. Who’s watching the kid?

Most just went with what was available, the Deobandi madrassa down the lane. As women’s empowerment gained momentum, there was a notable rise in madrassa enrolment throughout Bangladesh. New madrassas began appearing across the country, offering mothers reassurance that their children were receiving education in a safe and supervised environment, under the pretext of Deobandi interpretation of Islamic texts. 

The Evolution of Deobandi ‘Qawmi’ Madrassa

The Barlevis and Deobandis both followed the Hanafi jurisprudence, it meant they prayed, fasted in the same way but religious interpretation significantly differed. Barelvi maintained strong Sufi traditions and a reverence for saints which held considerable sway in Bengal’s religious landscape. 

This dynamic began to change with the arrival and subsequent spread of the Deobandi movement, which originated in North India with the founding of Darul Uloom Deoband in 1867. The Deobandis promoted a return to scriptural sources, prioritizing the Quran and Hadith, and notably distanced themselves from many Sufi customs long associated with the Barelvi tradition. The Deobandis in Bangladesh also participated in the Afghan Jihad that empowered their ideology in Bangladesh. Prior to that Deobandis were against the British, which helped them gather huge following. 

Several factors contributed to the expansion of Deobandi madrassas in Bangladesh. These included the establishment of Qawmi madrassas that adopted the Dars-i-Nizami curriculum, financial backing from business communities, and the availability of land and resources particularly during the economic growth experienced in the 1960s. As these institutions began to organize themselves into federations and rationalize their curricula, they grew in influence, gradually eclipsing the older Barelvi-oriented institutions. 

Over time, the Deobandi approach became predominant within the Quomi madrassa system, leaving a lasting impact on the structure and focus of religious education in Bangladesh. The main scholar of Barlevi movement known as Ala Hazrat Ahmed Reza Khan Berlavi, declared the founders of Deobandi movement as disbelievers and heretics. However, these differences and debates, didn’t gather much attention in Bengal as the Deobandi influence kept multiplying and Barlevi depreciating. Till today many don’t know the Barlevi-Deobandi difference, despite having studied in Qawmi Madrassa. 

Qawmi Madrassas and Jamaat E Islami in the Sheikh Hasina Era

Under the Awami League’s administration, Qawmi Madrassas secured formal recognition, with the Dawra-e-Hadith degree attaining equivalence to a master’s in Islamic Studies or Arabic. As Bangladesh’s economy advanced, these madrassas saw a notable uptick in donations, which subsequently enhanced their institutional resources and reach to empower organizations like Hefazot E Islam. 

Notably, the government appeared to overlook the significant doctrinal rift between the Barelvi and Deobandi traditions a misstep that, in hindsight, echoes even among prominent figures such as Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi, who once attended ceremonies at Darul Uloom Deoband, inadvertently bestowing it with symbolic legitimacy. 

Apart from Barlevi and Deobandi groups, the third influential player under the Hanafi jurisprudence umbrella was Jamaat E Islami. Although doctrinal disagreements have historically separated Jamaat-e-Islami from the Deobandi leadership that dominates many Qawmi madrassas, Jamaat-e-Islami has nevertheless managed to exert notable influence over madrassa students in Bangladesh especially during moments of July political turbulence targeting Sheikh Hasina’s comparatively secular administration. 

Traditionally, Deobandis were careful in not letting their students mingle with Jamaat. However, after the accreditation, the Madrassa students joined coaching centres and classes for admission test and English learning. Jamaat saw this as an opportunity to unite with them especially during Covid, where online platforms were used to bridge gaps. This was despite huge theological differences, the unity for a common goal eventually emerged. 

Previously, senior Deobandi figures had accused Jamaat-e-Islami, particularly their founder Abu Ala Moududi, of heretical inclinations. These accusations were rooted in critiques by Moududi and Muslim Brotherhood of certain revered companions of the Prophet and their perceived theological affinities with Shia interpretations of Islam. 

Moulana Syed Fazlul Karim, a prominent Deobandi cleric and leader of Islami Andolon Bangladesh, recently communicated to journalist Khaled Mouhiuddin his vision for Bangladesh to implement Islamic Shariah governance, drawing explicit parallels to the systems in place under the Taliban in Afghanistan or in the Islamic Republic of Iran. Moulana Karim is also an official political ally of Jamaat E Islami for upcoming election. 

Sheikh Hasina made significant strides toward advancing women’s economic empowerment, yet her efforts were ultimately overshadowed by the rapid growth of religious mobilization. This widespread surge in religious activism played a critical role in her eventual removal from power and subsequent exile on August 5, often outplayed by same individuals who endorsed her honorary title as ‘Qawmi Janani’.

If the international community allows these narratives to disappear in silence, it becomes complicit in its own oppression, it claims to abhor.

Four hours. Seriously? That’s what justice boils down to now in Bangladesh? Just four measly hours of parole for Farzana Rupa and Shakil Ahmed. Dragged through handcuff by malicious charges and failed to say goodbye to a dying mom they hadn’t met in almost a year.

Did they have adequate time for travel, attending the funeral, and returning to jail? Did anyone even stop to think what a single hour with her mom meant to Rupa?

Her mother spent her last days begging for her daughter’s release, but sure, let’s pretend that’s not the headline in Bangladesh. 

Did anyone in power spare a thought for the wreckage left behind? Punishing a Professional journalist on murder charges she had no stake on. Not just playing with her career, her family, her honour and the life of her recently deceased mother. Who will take responsibility for the death of her mother? 

A heartbreaking conversation with Rupa’s friend

Ms. Charlotte Jacquemart, a respected Swiss journalist, criticized the ongoing detention of Bangladeshi journalists Farzana Rupa and Shakil Ahmed. Her statements are direct and deeply personal, underscoring what she describes as a tragic situation impacting not only the journalists but also their families and professional circles.

Both Rupa and Ahmed have been incarcerated for ten months. During this period, they have not been granted access to proper legal representation. Jacquemart, who has a close professional and personal relationship with Farzana Rupa, noted that multiple requests for bail have been denied, even as Rupa’s mother’s health deteriorated. The lack of release prevented Rupa from providing care or support during this critical time her mother needed. 

The consequences of their detention extend beyond the prison walls. Their families, particularly minor children, are left without financial or emotional support. Jacquemart highlighted that the absence of adequate medical treatment for Rupa’s mother—stemming from the journalists’ inability to intervene—ultimately resulted in a tragic loss, as confirmed by medical professionals.

On one occasion, authorities allowed the journalists four hours of parole to visit Rupa’s dying mother. However, logistical process meant three hours were spent in travel by prison van, leaving just one hour to see her mother’s dead body.

Jacquemart asserts that the case violates both international human rights standards and Bangladeshi constitutional guarantees, specifically regarding press freedom. She also criticized the Bangladeshi Interim leadership of Noble Laureate Yunus, alleging a targeted campaign against critics—including journalists, lawyers, activists, and minorities—while convicted criminals and terrorists are released.

In her concluding remarks, Jacquemart called on Western governments to reconsider their support for the current Bangladeshi administration, suggesting that the leadership prioritizes personal power and targeted retribution over the welfare of the Bangladeshi people or adherence to democratic principles.

Why was Rupa arrested?

Farzana Rupa’s professional trajectory was anything but ordinary—she made a name for herself by tackling high-stakes, controversial topics head-on. As principal correspondent and anchor at Ekattor TV, she played a pivotal role in shaping coverage of major political controversies and social issues in Bangladesh. Her leadership extended to hosting critical debates and shedding light on human rights abuses, which inevitably attracted both public attention and, regrettably, threats from more radical groups.

Her investigative work on cases like the Pohela Boishakh sexual assaults and interviews with polarizing figures such as Taslima Nasreen garnered international recognition. This visibility, while elevating her professional profile, also exposed her to significant personal risk. Rupa was known for open support for Prime Minister in exile Sheikh Hasina during the turbulent July protests of 2024, coupled with her readiness to challenge those in power, placed her squarely in the spotlight following the change in government.

Subsequently, both she and her husband faced arrest, charged with incitement to murder, and were held without bail. Many Political observers interpret these developments as part of a broader, politically driven effort to suppress independent journalism in Bangladesh.

Rupa’s tears to the UN

Farzana Rupa made urgent appeals to the United Nations while she was detained, but, frankly, there was no timely intervention. Her family paid the price. Her mother had passed away. Will the UN acknowledge any responsibility for a loss that perhaps could have been avoided? Given that Rupa couldn’t be present, advocate for medical care, or even offer basic comfort, one must wonder about the effectiveness of these international mechanisms.

The situation raises a larger issue: will this tragedy prompt any real reflection or policy change, or will it simply fade from attention, with Rupa’s unanswered appeals lost in the noise? The lack of response speaks volumes about the current state of international accountability.

A cruel crossroad in Bangladesh

The narratives around Rupa and Ahmed highlight a deep crisis in Bangladesh – a powerful mix of political alienation and human rights degradation. Individuals become collateral damage to state strategies to nullify dissent; Their bodies and psyche serve as dark reminders of the severe cost of Journalism in an increasingly authoritarian means. Government tactics, remnants of authoritarian regimes around the world, show a worrying model of governance based on the oppression. 

Farzana Rupa and Shakil Ahmed are like symbols. They are faces that marked a scenario of overwhelming darkness. They force us to examine not only their unfortunate circumstances, but to confront the systemic injustices that permeate Bangladesh’s political scenario. Their stories are a call of duty to global citizens, reminding them that true democracy cannot exist when dissent is criminalized.

If the international community allows these narratives to disappear in silence, it becomes complicit in its own oppression, it claims to abhor. A collective awakening for twin tragedies, though deeply personal, illuminates a much greater evil: the erosion of human dignity by another Noble laureate. 

Disclaimer: Views expressed by writers in this section are their own and do not reflect Milli Chronicle’s point-of-view.

Bangladeshi democracy has always been a bit of a balancing act—it’s fragile, often disputed, and shaped by deep mistrust among the parties involved.

Yunus stepped in like a hero after Sheikh Hasina’s narrow safe exit. Seriously, why Yunus though? Sure, that Nobel Prize glow—“banker to the poor,” all very inspirational. But running a whole country? That’s a bit out of his usual comfort zone, isn’t it? Critics aren’t buying his résumé for democracy. He’s got a squeaky-clean political record, yeah, but there’s the tiny problem of zero political success, too.

Did any of that bother the crowd of fired-up July protesters celebrating him? Or the business bigwigs who just wanted things to stabilize for a minute? Doubt it. People were desperate for any kind of shake-up. Someone new. Yunus just fit through the vibe—calm, politically unknown, totally untested on the big stage. Yunus on many occasions on International and National Media, claimed he or his cabinet has no plans to ban Awami League. He has gone to the extent that it is up to Awami League if they want to participate or not, yet Awami League activities were repressively banned without any referendum.

Islamists, NCP stage ‘Mist Spray’ protest in Summer to ban Awami league?

Awami League-oldest, secular, the party that led Bangladesh to freedom. But now, its legacy is questioned. Sheikh Hasina, the longest serving female Prime Minister, once stood in parliament and called Yunus the “Blood Sucker of the poor”. Now, the tables have turned. The UN’s fact-finding report blamed Hasina, her party, and security forces for the deaths of at least 1,400 people during the 2024 protests-children among the victims, crimes against humanity, said the report. Awami League pushed back: the report lacked their side, relied on unnamed witnesses and many more accusations. But who listens to the Awami League now? The UN’s word carries more weight, its credibility unshaken in the global court of opinion.

Protests went on for days, with people demanding that the Awami League be banned. The crowd was a bit of a weird mix — Islamists like Mufti Jasimuddin Rahmani, Asif Adnan, Hizbut Tahrir, Jamaat-e-Islami, and Hefazot-e-Islam all shouting for the party to be shut down. Some wondered if this was a real uprising or just a show put on by the government. Some said the ultimatum to Yunus wasn’t genuine, just a way to make the ban look legit.

Yet, Yunus, now acting as the caretaker, ordered a gentle mist spray at the summer camps — basically keeping the protesters hydrated, not firing bullets. Did that cool things down or just buy some time? The protesters weren’t all in agreement about singing the National Anthem. Some felt uncomfortable with singing it because it was written by Rabindranath Tagore, many referred to him as Hindu despite him being from the Brahma Samaj. The protest interestingly wasn’t joined by BNP, other centrist, leftist parties but the newly formed student party NCP looked like they were a cover to the Islamists.

Is Banning Awami league a legitimate move?

Some argue that banning the Awami League because, as the ruling party, it ordered killings and human rights abuses—many of its members carried out these acts—seems understandable on some level. However, doing so amounts to punishing the party collectively, which is problematic. International human rights laws and criminal justice principles emphasize that responsibility should be based on individual actions, not on group membership. Punishing the entire party ignores this important rule and can lead to more harm. History shows that punishing groups doesn’t stop violence; instead, it often fuels cycles of revenge, pushes authoritarian measures, and weakens efforts for real justice and reconciliation in transitioning societies.

Comparing Bangladesh’s current situation to transitional justice processes in places like South Africa after apartheid, Liberia following its conflict, or Bosnia is not quite accurate. Those scenarios involved extreme events like genocide, ethnic cleansing, or civil war. While Bangladesh faces serious challenges, it doesn’t meet the legal criteria for mass atrocities to that extent that would justify drastic measures like dissolving political parties. Even in those extreme cases, restrictions on political participation were used sparingly, temporarily, and often with international oversight or as part of negotiated agreements. So far, Bangladesh hasn’t experienced the kind of broad consensus or legal process needed to meet that high threshold. Also, frameworks like South Africa’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission were designed specifically for their contexts and weren’t meant to be general models for banning political parties in countries trying to rebuild democracy after authoritarian rule.

The UN Fact Finding report also simply mentions that elements connected to the party actively supported the repression. This makes you wonder: how much was the party involved in the violence? Recommendation 370 of the Office of the UN High Commissioner of Human Rights, Fact Finding report into the Bangladesh July/August killings state to refrain from banning political parties that would undermine genuine return to a multi-party democracy. Although, the report doesn’t qualify as a legal verdict, yet the report was unjustly cited by the interim to oppress, torture, imprison and attack on Awami League activities. The attacks happened with both law enforcement and mobs, sometimes through a mixture of both. After the forced resignation of Chief Justice through forced anarchy inside court premises and treating Awami League activists without ‘Innocent until Proven guilty’ shows the reality. The fairness of judiciary and trials are being questioned, many believe the verdict is ready and interim is just buying time for retribution.

The Amendment to repressive Anti-Terrorism Act

The newest update to the Anti-Terrorism Act really hits hard against free speech and the right to protest. First off, now the government can ‘temporarily suspend’ any group they suspect of being involved in terrorist activities, on top of their previous power to ‘prohibit’ an organization under Section 18. These powers, which previously only applied to prohibited groups under Section 20, now extend automatically to those that are suspended.

This means they can shut down offices, freeze bank accounts and assets, stop members from leaving the country, seize belongings, and even ban any public support or displays of solidarity for the group. Basically, the government can now quickly neutralize a party or organization with just a ‘temporary suspension,’ without having to go through the more permanent ‘prohibition’ process. But here’s the catch—how long does a ‘temporary’ suspension last? The law doesn’t say so, so in practice, it could go on forever, even if they call it temporary.

On top of that, they’ve massively expanded their power to prevent people from supporting or advocating for these groups under Section 20(e). It now clearly states that publishing statements, promoting online or through social media, or organizing marches, meetings, or press events in favor of or supporting the group is strictly forbidden. It’s an alarming step up in control, with serious implications for anyone speaking out or showing support.

Why Banning without referendum?

The Awami League, Bangladesh’s oldest and most influential party, was banned by the interim government without holding a referendum, even though surveys by Voice of America and others showed that most Bangladeshis didn’t support such a ban. While the interim authorities justified this move by citing the Anti-Terrorism Act and mentioning ongoing investigations into alleged crimes by Awami League leaders, they didn’t seek any direct public approval or hold a plebiscite. This has raised questions about whether the move really reflects democratic legitimacy.

Although the Awami League has faced serious accusations of electoral misconduct in the elections of 2014, 2018, and 2024, it has previously won allegedly free elections under caretaker governments, which shows it has broad support. In this case, it seems to be a victim of exclusion by an interim administration that has never gone to the electorate, not even at the local council level.

Gloomy path towards transition

Bangladeshi democracy has always been a bit of a balancing act—it’s fragile, often disputed, and shaped by deep mistrust among the parties involved. The accusations against the Awami League, whether it’s about election rigging or acting too heavy-handed, aren’t something new; they reflect a broader political culture where holding onto power sometimes seems more important than following the process.

Under the ban, millions of Awami League voter’s political rights are pretty much gone. Any kind of support for the Awami League—whether you say it out loud, write about it, or post online—could be considered a crime. Even just social meetings peacefully with other supporters might get you arrested. Prior to the ban, Bangladesh recently went multiple notches downward in the democratic index by the Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU).

Disclaimer: Views expressed by writers in this section are their own and do not reflect Milli Chronicle’s point-of-view.

S M Faiyaz Hossain

Cultural and religious minorities in Bangladesh are also suffering due to rising extremism.

The New York Times published a report titled “As Bangladesh Reinvents Itself, Islamist Hard-Liners See an Opening,” detailing the rise of Islamist extremism in Bangladesh during political changes. The report discusses how religious extremists are taking advantage after the removal of former leader Sheikh Hasina. 

It highlights incidents like bans on women’s soccer and public harassment of women who do not follow conservative dress codes. 

There have been rallies demanding the death penalty for actions seen as blasphemy. The report notes that some Islamist groups, including previously banned ones, are pushing for stricter religious rules in the government. 

Officials are working on a new constitution that might change secularism to pluralism. This shift is causing concern over weakening democratic values and increasing risks for women and minorities.

Bangladesh used to be known for its secular roots and cultural diversity, but in recent years, extremist ideas have been resurfacing. Although this isn’t an entirely new foundation, it has become more noticeable and concerning since 5^th of August 2024.

Extremists are attacking secular bloggers and targeting women’s sports and cultural events. Their goal is to impose strict religious views or a political caliphate on a society that values diversity. This rise in extremist actions is worrying because it threatens freedoms, especially those of women and minorities, and poses a danger to the country’s democratic setup. 

A particularly troubling aspect is the attack on women’s rights to participate in public life. For example, some women’s football matches had to be cancelled because of threats from extremist groups. This shows how these groups are trying to take over spaces that were once empowering for women. Sports provide young women with opportunities to move up socially and gain international recognition, but these are now under threat. 

Such actions not only limit their dreams but also send a negative message about the shrinking space for women in public and professional life. It reflects a broader aim to suppress women’s rights under the guise of religious morality, harming the progress made in gender equality over the years.

Lifting bans on Islamist political parties like Jamat-e-Islami and freeing extremists like Mufti Jashimuddin Rahmani known as the Anwar Al Awlaki of Bangladesh, give these groups more confidence. While the interim government might claim these actions are part of a broader peace strategy, they risk legitimizing extremist ideas and giving them a platform to grow. 

Inadequate systems to monitor released extremists make the situation worse, providing spaces for radical elements to regroup and plan for something like the meticulously planned October 7^th Attack orchestrated by Hamas. 

Meanwhile, a banned organization like Notorious Hizbut Tahrir openly propagated their influence and participation in Anti-Quota protest which for them was a tactical Jihad to oust the exiled Government and get a step ahead for their future plan of implementing a Caliphate. 

This political leniency by Interim Government weakens public trust in governance and helps extremist narratives spread, they have made few arrests while the extremist leaders are free and that questions if arresting the activists while ignoring the leadership is a soft ploy to leverage a tactical narrative. 

Cultural and religious minorities in Bangladesh are also suffering due to rising extremism. Attacks on Sufi shrines and other minority religious sites highlight an increase in intolerance. These aren’t isolated events but part of a plan to make all of Bangladeshi society conform to strict ideological rules. 

Targeting cultural figures, authors, and artists underlines this trend, aiming to silence voices of dissent and alternative perspectives. Such actions threaten Bangladesh’s rich culture, traditionally a mix of diverse influences. We must also consider socio-economic factors driving this phenomenon.

Poverty, unemployment, and lack of access to education create conditions where extremist views can take root. Young people, especially those from marginalized backgrounds, often join these movements seeking a sense of identity, purpose, or community. 

Extremist groups exploit these vulnerabilities using targeted propaganda and recruitment strategies, often through social media. Addressing these foundational issues requires comprehensive policies that promote inclusive development and foster social unity. 

Political Researcher and former Pentagon Official Michael Rubin, in a US Congressional briefing highlighted the growing concern of Radicalization in Bangladesh and opinionated an article ‘Is Bangladesh the Next Afghanistan’. 

Rubin is worried about how Noble Laurate Yunus is leading because it seems less tolerant than people expected. This is particularly true about how the government handles freedom of the press and different political views. 

Yunus is famous around the world for his work in microfinance, which helps poor people with small loans. He took charge of the interim government after Sheikh Hasina was removed from power. 

At first, many welcomed Yunus because they thought he would be different from Hasina, who was seen as too controlling. But Rubin thinks Yunus’s government is letting strict Islamist groups have too much power and is stopping people from speaking freely, which could hurt democracy. 

Rubin is especially concerned about the freedom of the press under Yunus’s rule. Some journalists, like Farzana Rupa and Shakil Ahmed, have reportedly been brutally jailed on vague and ambiguous murder charges, raising fears about free speech in Bangladesh.

Over 1,000 journalists seen as “too secular” have reportedly been fired, showing a lack of tolerance for different opinions. Rubin also mentions problems faced by Julfikar Ali Manik, who reports on Islamist groups, and former Member of Parliament Fazle Karim Chowdhury, who works to protect minority rights. 

These issues suggest that Yunus’s temporary government might not be supporting the diversity and human rights that are important for democracy.

Increasingly, people are showing public support for Hamas, which is a growing concern. This support is visible in rallies and in the way some individuals dress to symbolize the group. 

Bangladesh, for many years, has had a clear stance against Israel. It has consistently supported Palestine through diplomatic efforts and has officially recognized only the Fatah-led government based in the West Bank. However, there is a noticeable rise in grassroots support for Hamas, especially in the wake of the ongoing Israel-Gaza conflict. 

In this situation, extremists have spoken out against American interests in Bangladesh. Recently, some Islamists verbally called for aggressive protests in the U.S. Embassy in Dhaka. Along with Anti-India rhetoric, hatred for Trump’s America and Israel are seen. 

These tensions are fuelled by foreign policy support for Israel. The Interim Government was supposed to carry forward a Peaceful transition towards Democratic Election, while the reality looks, they have political interests to gain in the name of ‘reform’. 

Serving the interests, they are currently capitalizing on Islamists for majority support while being harsh and harsher on Secularists, Awami league activists, minorities and anyone associated with the 1971 Liberation war as tweeted by Lemkin Institute of Genocidal Prevention with multiple red flags. 

Disclaimer: Views expressed by writers in this section are their own and do not reflect Milli Chronicle’s point-of-view.

With Bangladesh sharing the longest land border with India, any adverse situation in the country directly affects India’s security and stability.

India has reportedly expressed its dissatisfaction with the United States’ involvement in the upcoming elections in Bangladesh, emphasizing that such actions may destabilize the government led by Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina.

The message from India comes ahead of the G20 Leaders Summit, where both President Joe Biden and Prime Minister Hasina are scheduled to attend. This development holds significance, as India believes that a weak government in Bangladesh could have adverse consequences for regional security and bilateral relations.

India’s Concerns and Perspective

According to unnamed sources cited by Anandabazar Patrika, a Kolkata-based newspaper, India has raised concerns about the potential political concessions to Jamaat-e-Islami, a fundamentalist organization in Bangladesh. New Delhi fears that such concessions could pave the way for fundamentalism to gain a stronghold in Dhaka, endangering the liberal environment that currently exists. India shares the view with Washington that a weak government under Hasina’s leadership would not be in the best interest of either country.

Indian diplomats have reportedly communicated their concerns to the Biden administration at various levels of meetings. The decision to withdraw American troops from Afghanistan and the subsequent power shift to the Taliban have significantly altered the security dynamics in the entire region, including India’s Northeast Frontier region. India perceives the situation as precarious, with the Taliban’s ascendancy in Afghanistan raising concerns about the safety and stability of neighboring countries.

India’s concerns extend beyond Bangladesh, as it believes that America’s policies toward Kabul and other neighboring nations have created discomfort and raised questions about national interests. With Bangladesh sharing the longest land border with India, any adverse situation in the country directly affects India’s security and stability.

India’s Warnings and Consequences

Indian officials have warned the Biden administration that patronizing the growth of Jamaat-e-Islami could lead to increased cross-border terrorism and enhanced Chinese influence in Bangladesh, outcomes that are undesirable for Washington. While the U.S. views Jamaat as an Islamic political organization, India firmly believes that it is controlled by radical fundamentalist groups and Pakistan, rather than representing a moderate stance.

India has also expressed its reservations about the Biden administration’s separate visa policy for Bangladesh, which is seen as a direct interference in the internal politics of Bangladesh. Under this policy, individuals involved in disrupting the upcoming elections will be denied entry to the United States. Indian diplomats argue that this move undermines regional stability and represents an imposition of U.S. laws on another country.

Positive Engagement and Regional Stability

During a recent visit to New Delhi, a delegation from Bangladesh Awami League held meetings with top leaders of India’s Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and central government ministers. The delegation conveyed the message that the alliance between Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) and Jamaat-e-Islami poses a threat to regional stability. Agriculture Minister Abdur Razzaque, the leader of the delegation, had a positive meeting with Indian External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar. Following the meeting, Razzaque stated that the government led by Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina is committed to preventing Bangladesh’s soil from being used for anti-India activities.

India’s warnings regarding the potential consequences of empowering Jamaat-e-Islami and the implications for cross-border terrorism and Chinese influence highlight the importance of maintaining a strong and stable government in Bangladesh. As both India and the United States navigate their bilateral relations and engage with regional dynamics, constructive dialogue and cooperation will be crucial in ensuring peace and stability in South Asia.