Horrors of her misrule surface after Sheikh Hasina flees to India

Weeks of protests by students in which the police and her party thugs shot and killed hundreds, the army’s refusal to shoot at people sealed her fate.

On August 5, she boarded a helicopter and together with her sister, fled to India, the real masters of Bangladesh.

Student protests erupted in early July against a quota system that allocated 30 percent of all government jobs to families of those who had fought against the Pakistan army during the civil war in 1971.

These benefits were then extended to include the children and grandchildren of the ‘fighters’, as well as ethnic minorities and disabled people.

Given lack of private sectors jobs, the government is the largest employer in the country.

The quota system allocated 56 percent of all government jobs to party loyalties.

It was cronyism at its worst.

The principal beneficiaries were members of Hasina’s Awami League (AL) party.

True, the AL led by Hasina’s father Sheikh Mujibur Rahman had played a major role in achieving the country’s independence but that was more than 50 years ago.

Sheikh Hasina first came to power in 1996 followed by a second longer stint in office from 2009.

It was her second 15-year rule that was characterized by the worst kind of corruption, suppression and incarceration of opposition figures, forced disappearances and extrajudicial killings.

Leaders of the Jama‘at-e Islami were executed after kangaroo trials.

The party was banned.

Mir Arman, a barrister, was kidnapped from his home by Bangladesh’s notorious intelligence agency, the Directorate General of Forces Intelligence (DGFI).

His father, a leader of the Jamaat-e Islami, was hanged in 2016 after a sham trial.

For eight years, the regime denied any knowledge of Arman’s whereabouts.

Following Hasina’s escape, Arman was released on August 6.

Hundreds of other political prisoners have also been released including the main opposition leader, Begum Khalida Zia, a former prime minister.

Last January, elections were held that were boycotted by all opposition parties because of lack of transparency.

Sheikh Hasina claimed to have swept the polls in which only her party participated.

With such a dubious mandate, she thought all opposition parties had been consigned to the political wilderness.

It was however, the revival of the quota system in June of this year, that was scrapped in 2018 following student protests, that again led to protests last month.

Far from addressing students’ concerns, Hasina’s regime sent the police, paramilitary forces and Awami League thugs to attack them at university campuses.

Protests spread to other campuses, as did the regime crackdown.

Internet and other communications network were suspended.

Such measures failed to quell student anger.

Other segments of society, especially members of opposition parties also joined the protests.

The regime’s violent crackdown continued with some Awami League members accusing students of being “traitors”.

This is a familiar ploy deployed by oppressors—the Pakistan army is notorious for labelling those who criticize its illegal intrusion into politics—but it ultimately backfires.

As the protests grew, Hasina’s regime sought the army’s help.

To their credit, junior officers of the Bangladesh army had sent a letter to the army chief that they will not obey orders to fire on people.

The army top brass realized that there could be a revolt in the army if they ordered troops to fire on people.

Hasina’s fate was sealed.

It is interesting to note that the army chief, General Waker uz-Zaman is married to a distant cousin of Hasina.

She thought this would ensure the army chief’s loyalty as well as the fact that she had superseded a number of generals to appoint Waker to the top slot.

The general faced a dilemma but ultimately resisted pressure from Hasina to crack down on protesters.

Despite this, she refused to relent even though her sister and top aides pleaded with her.

It was a phone call from her US-based son, Sajeeb Wazed Joy that finally persuaded her to quit.

The army gave her only 45 minutes to pack her bags and leave as the massive crowd of protesters was surging and getting closer to her house.

If she failed to act quickly, the army would not be able to save her.

Given the mood of the protesters, there is little doubt that had they got hold of her, she would have been lynched.

A day earlier (August 5), the police and the heavily-armed Awami League thugs had murdered 135 people.

This was the worst one-day slaughter of civilians in Bangladesh history.

Her father, Sheikh Mujib who led the movement for Bangladesh independence, was murdered, along with most of his family members, by the army in August 1975.

Following Hasina’s escape, Sheikh Mujib’s statue was smashed a la Saddam Husain in Baghdad in 2003.

Hasina and her sister Rehana survived the 1975 slaughter because they were out of the country.

Following in the footsteps of the Pakistan army, Bangladesh suffered several bouts of military rule.

If there was hope that with civilian rule, Bangladesh would escape the fate of Pakistan, it seems to hang in the balance at present.

The army chief has announced an Interim set-up comprising most political parties.

The students put forward the name of Nobel laureate, Muhammad Yunus to lead the Interim set-up.

They have also said the army should not have any role in governing.

Student leaders will have to remain vigilant to ensure the army does not tighten its grip on power.

India, the real master of Bangladesh, is very unhappy.

It has lost a loyal puppet.

During her rule, India tightened its grip on Bangladesh so much that in every department, there was an Indian representative who was the ultimate decision-maker of policy.

It related not only to foreign policy but also finance, commerce and even education.

Whether the new dispensation, even if temporary and tasked with holding elections, can remove such Indian influence is yet to be seen.

As for Hasina, her son Sajeeb said she will not be returning to Bangladesh.

He said the people are ungrateful and do not “appreciate” what she did for the country!

There were reports that she wanted to seek asylum in Britain but the British do not appear willing to accommodate here.

She may well spend the last few years of her life—she is 76 years old—in Mother India’s bosom.

The Interim set-up must ensure to not allow vigilantes to exact revenge.

This would not serve Bangladesh’s interests.

Those who have committed crimes should be given their day in court and afforded a fair trial.

There are important lessons in the Bangladesh experience for the people of Pakistan, especially students and junior officers.

Will they learn these lessons?