The resignation of Bangladeshi Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina on Monday and her government’s replacement with a military-led interim administration was followed by a spree of political violence. The parliament was taken over, Hasina’s palace was stormed, some of the former ruling party’s offices and the homes of its members were looted, and minority Hindus were attacked. Despite being regrettable, retributive political violence and the targeting of minorities are predictable in “revolutionary” situations.
What few could have foreseen though was that symbols of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, who’s known as “Bangabandhu” and is revered as the Father of the Nation, were also attacked. This included vandalism against his statues and murals as well as the burning of his memorial museum in the capital, which used to be his home and from where he declared Bangladesh’s independence. Even though he was Hasina’s father, he’s not guilty of the crimes that the so-called “peaceful pro-democracy protesters” accuse her of.
Some hated him at the time for his secularism as well as his non-Western alignment, thus explaining his assassination in 1975 and the military coup that followed, but much of that anger has passed since most of the population wasn’t even born by then and therefore has no personal memory of him. Regardless of whatever any Bangladeshi’s views might be about his policies, Bangabandhu is still the Father of the Nation, and targeting his symbols during the latest unrest bodes ill for Bangladesh’s future direction.
Only religious and political extremists would attack his symbols, which discredits the participants’ claims that they’re “peaceful pro-democracy protesters” and lends credence to Hasina’s that they’re actually radical anti-state forces. What happened bears all the hallmarks of the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) and their allies. They’ve been accused of cavorting with religious extremists and being political radicals, the claims of which aren’t unfounded.
The party’s founder Ziaur Rahman implemented Islamist policies upon coming to power two years after Bangabandhu’s assassination and then pivoted towards the West (including its then-Arab and -Chinese partners at the time). The rivalry between the BNP and Bangabandhu’s Awami League (AL) has remained a constant since then, as has the threat posed by the legally contentious Jamaat-e-Islami (JEI) movement, which is comprised of Pakistani loyalists who later allied with the BNP due to its Islamist policies.
Nevertheless, attacking Bangabandhu’s symbols in such a high-profile way at this crucial moment in national history sends the message that political violence will continue, with none of the AL’s supporters being safe. Unless the military can restore order, and it’s too early to tell even though everything appears to be moving in that direction, then the BNP-JEI might go on a killing spree against the AL. A huge exodus to India could then follow, which risks destabilizing already demographically tense border regions.
Even if that dark scenario doesn’t materialize, it’s clear that the BNP’s JEI foot soldiers won’t be pleased until their country erases the AL’s legacy of secularism and alignment with India. After all, that’s precisely what Bangabandhu represents, so targeting his symbols conveys their hatred of those policies and implies that some level of unrest might continue so long as they remain in force. Bangladesh has the sovereign right to promulgate whatever policies it wants, but this mustn’t be done under pressure.
It’s too early to predict whether the BNP-JEI will get all of what it wants, but the parliament in which the BNP didn’t participate due to boycotting January’s elections was just dissolved and its jailed leader was released right after, so it’s likely poised to play a role in the interim administration before new elections. In that event, the BNP and its JEI foot soldiers would stand a much greater chance of pressuring the authorities into distancing Bangladesh from India in some way, which could worsen regional tensions.
