Sheikh Hasina resigns amid turmoil

The protesters in Bangladesh had brought the Awami League government of Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina Wajed to its knees though nearly a 100 died in the latest round of protests, and this included policemen as well. Prime Minister Hasina had resigned, and left the country.

She went to India and it is being said that she is seeking political asylum in the United Kingdom. Sheikh Hasina wanted to counter the protests with government force but it backfired. When she tried to reach out to the protesters, it seemed too little too late.

Though the Bangladesh High Court had given a verdict in favour of the protesters over reservations in government jobs, the protesters wanted the government out. The public anger was certainly used by the opposition parties to pressurise the government. In January, Sheikh Hasina and the Awami League won a fourth term in office, and the political opposition, especially the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP), had boycotted it. The opposition felt that the elections were unfair, and even independent international observers felt that the elections were not above suspicion.

What seems to have gone against Sheikh Hasina was the fact that she did not realise the importance of opposition in a democratic setup, and she had completely marginalised the BNP.

There were of course irreconcilable differences between the Awami League and the BNP. The Awami League fought against Pakistan for freedom from Pakistan in 1971, and won it. But when Awami League leader Sheikh Mujibur Rehman turned authoritarian, he and his family were assassinated on August 15, 1975. Those who had carried out the killing and engineered the coup were generally supported by those in Bangladesh who were considered collaborators with the Pakistan army.

The rivalry crystallised around who fought for the freedom of Bangladesh. The reservation protests had also turned on the issue of reservation in government jobs for the descendants of the freedom fighters of Bangladesh in 1971. At a time when the economy was going through a downturn and jobs became scarce, the youth were unhappy and anger. Sheikh Hasina and her colleagues handled it quite crudely, polarising it as one between those who fought for the freedom of Bangladesh and those who collaborated with Pakistan. The students were not bothered about the differences between Awami League and the BNP.

Sheikh Hasina must have seen the writing on the wall, and she had resigned. It is being said that the family did not want her to continue because of the concern over her safety. It is known what role the army had played in the resignation of Sheikh Hasina. But its Army chief General Waker-Uz-Zaman had addressed the nation on television and assured that there would an interim government, and schools, colleges and government offices would remain open.

He said, “I promise you all, we will bring justice to all the murders and injustice. We request you to have faith in the army of the country. Please don’t go back to the path of violence and please return to non-violent and peaceful ways.” He said that he would confer with leaders of all major political parties, excluding Awami League, and also consult President Mohammed Shahabuddin.

The army then refuses to take over power. It wants to facilitate the emergence of a civilian government. It is doubtful whether the army in Bangladesh wants to call the shots from behind the scenes like in Pakistan. In 1975 and again in 1981, the army took over the reins of power if only for a short period before General Zia-ur-Rehman and General Ershad chose to turn civilians, found political parties and run for elections. It looks like the time for army rule is a thing of the past in Pakistan and in Bangladesh.