In the days following the fall of Sheikh Hasina’s regime, I, like many others in the Bangladeshi diaspora, felt a surge of hope. I was filled with pride as young people—students—rose up to demand a better, fairer Bangladesh. This movement, driven by the energy and passion of youth, was not just about removing an authoritarian government; it was about reclaiming the future, about asserting that the people of Bangladesh deserve a country where justice, transparency, and human rights are respected. But as I’ve watched the movement evolve, my initial optimism has been tempered by growing concerns.
Being away from home doesn’t diminish my connection to Bangladesh; if anything, it sharpens my focus on the challenges that our country faces. From my vantage point, I’ve seen the cracks that have begun to appear in the student movement. These cracks, though small now, have the potential to widen and fracture the unity that has been the movement’s greatest strength. The events at Chittagong University (CU) and during the observance of Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman’s death anniversary have been particularly troubling, signaling that the movement is at a critical juncture.
Internal Conflicts at Chittagong University
The resignation of a coordinator and four assistant coordinators from the Anti-Discrimination Students Movement (ADSM) at CU highlights the difficulties of leadership and governance that the movement is currently grappling with. Al Masnun, one of the resigning coordinators, publicly expressed his frustration, accusing the central leadership of ignoring local decisions and making choices that alienated local leaders.
These actions, such as allowing students to enter halls despite a collective decision to the contrary and failing to address concerns about the expansion of the coordinating committee, have sparked significant dissent and raised serious questions about the inclusiveness and transparency of the movement’s decision-making process.
As I reflect on this from abroad, I can’t help but feel a deep sense of concern. The strength of the student movement has always been its grassroots nature, with local leaders playing a vital role in mobilizing support and implementing decisions. But when these voices are sidelined, it risks fracturing the movement and weakening its ability to enact meaningful change. This tension between centralized leadership and grassroots coordination is not unique to Bangladesh; it’s a challenge that many movements around the world face. But it’s crucial that our movement in Bangladesh finds a way to navigate this tension without losing the unity and focus that has brought it this far.
The Troubling Events at Dhanmondi 32
Even more concerning than the internal conflicts at CU are the events that unfolded at Dhanmondi 32 on Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman’s death anniversary. Young men, many wielding pipes, steel rods, and sticks, took control of the area, stopping vehicles, checking mobile phones, and even assaulting individuals they deemed suspicious.
In recent years, Mujib has been deified by the Awami League regime, with his image and legacy being used to justify and bolster Sheikh Hasina’s increasingly autocratic rule. This deification has not gone unnoticed or unchallenged.
Among many in Bangladesh, there is a growing resentment against Mujib, not only because of his association with Hasina’s authoritarian governance but also due to the historical realities of his leadership.
Mujib, despite his pivotal role in the liberation of Bangladesh, was no saint. His time in power was marked by a shift toward autocracy, where he presided over the beginning of cronyism and 'looter politics.' The establishment of the BAKSAL one-party system, his suppression of dissent, and the rampant corruption that began under his watch have left a complicated legacy. Many view Mujib as a leader who laid the groundwork for the very issues—authoritarianism, nepotism, and political violence—that the student movement is now fighting against.
However, it is also undeniable that Mujib is an important figure in Bangladesh’s history. His leadership during the 1971 Liberation War earned him the title of 'Father of the Nation,' and for many, his contributions to the country’s independence are worthy of respect.
The right to pay respects to him on his death anniversary should not be infringed upon, and the actions of the student movement at Dhanmondi 32—where individuals were harassed and assaulted—run counter to the very ideals of freedom and justice that the movement claims to uphold.
What I find particularly disturbing is how quickly these actions mirrored the very oppression that the movement sought to overthrow. The Business Standard reported that these young men, under the guise of preventing a so-called counter-coup by Awami League and its allies, interrogated pedestrians, checked their identity cards and phones, and manhandled visitors who came to pay their respects to Bangabandhu. This behavior is a clear violation of constitutional rights, particularly the right to privacy and freedom of movement. It’s a painful reminder that even after the fall of an authoritarian regime, the culture of oppression can persist, often perpetuated by those who once fought against it.
The parallels between these incidents and the actions of the Awami League and Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) activists during previous rallies in Dhaka are striking. The only difference this time was that the police, who once played a central role in such abuses, remained passive observers.
This shift from a movement rooted in resistance to one engaging in the same abuses of power it once fought against is a dangerous development that threatens to undermine the very principles of justice and equity that the movement was founded upon.
Condemning Moral Policing: A Misguided Overreach
Another recent event that deeply concerns me is the moral policing carried out by students in Savar’s Ashulia area, where they raided a residential hotel and apprehended 15 individuals, accusing them of engaging in "immoral activities." These students took it upon themselves to enforce their own moral code, locking the hotel and detaining consenting adults who were there for private reasons. This incident is not only a violation of individual rights but also a dangerous precedent that the student movement must categorically reject.
The role of students in a democratic society is to advocate for justice, equality, and the protection of fundamental rights—not to impose their personal moral views on others. The actions taken in Ashulia are an alarming overreach and a clear abuse of power. By engaging in such moral policing, these students have not only violated the privacy and autonomy of fellow citizens but also risk alienating the broader public who may now view the movement as overstepping its bounds.
Consenting adults have the right to their privacy and to make personal choices without fear of harassment or judgment by others. The student movement must distance itself from such actions and reaffirm its commitment to upholding the rights and freedoms of all individuals.
The cause of justice and fairness is not served by moral policing but by ensuring that everyone, regardless of their personal choices, is treated with dignity and respect.
A Call for Reflection and Accountability
From where I sit, thousands of miles away, I was relieved to hear that key organizers like Sarjis Alam publicly condemned these actions.
Speaking at Dhaka University, Sarjis condemned the attacks and harassment as violations of human rights, stressing that such behavior is not in line with the spirit of the mass uprising. He also called for the expulsion of any coordinators involved in these actions and committed to seeking justice through legal means.
These steps are crucial for restoring the movement’s integrity, but they also highlight a deeper need for reflection and accountability within the movement.
It’s clear to me that the movement must confront the internal dynamics that have allowed such incidents to occur in the first place.
This includes addressing the rise of fake coordinators and unauthorized committees that are using the movement’s name to pursue personal or political objectives. These rogue elements not only dilute the movement’s message but also create divisions within its ranks, weakening its overall effectiveness.
Sarjis’s warning about these fake coordinators and his call for the movement to act as a pressure group rather than an authority are important reminders that the movement must maintain its focus on advocacy and reform, rather than becoming entangled in the very power structures it seeks to challenge.
The Daily Star's coverage reminds us of the harassment and violence faced by journalists and citizens. The expectations created by the student-led uprising were high, and it’s clear that the interim government, along with political and pressure groups like the student movement, bears the responsibility of ensuring a safe environment for all, particularly journalists who are vital to a functioning democracy. The swift and strong condemnation by student leaders is commendable, but the movement must be even more vigilant in preventing a return to the same excesses that characterized the past regime.
The Role of the Diaspora
As a member of the Bangladeshi diaspora, I feel a profound connection to the events unfolding in my homeland. We who live abroad have a unique perspective—we see our country both up close, through our emotional ties, and from a distance, which can sometimes offer a clearer view of the broader picture. This dual perspective compels me to urge the student movement to reflect deeply on its current trajectory.
One of the most significant risks I see is the possibility that the movement, in its effort to consolidate power and effect change, might lose sight of the very principles that gave it strength. The events at Dhanmondi 32 are a clear warning: if the movement does not actively work to prevent the abuses of power it once fought against, it could very easily become the very thing it sought to overthrow.
I’ve seen how other movements have faltered when they’ve allowed internal divisions to grow unchecked or when they’ve failed to hold their own members accountable for actions that go against the movement’s principles.
The Bangladeshi student movement is at a critical juncture, and it must take decisive action to ensure that it does not repeat the mistakes of the past.
A Path Forward
Despite being physically distant from my beloved country, my profound love for it drives me to ponder on the strategies the movement must adopt to overcome the obstacles ahead. The internal conflicts at CU and the troubling events at Dhanmondi 32 highlight the critical challenges facing the student movement as it transitions from protest to governance. These challenges are not insurmountable, but they require a concerted effort to address issues of transparency, accountability, and inclusivity within the movement. The movement’s leadership must take proactive steps to strengthen its internal cohesion, ensure that all members are aligned with its core values, and prevent the rise of rogue elements that threaten to derail its efforts.
Moreover, the movement must develop a long-term strategy for governance and nation-building. The post-Hasina era presents a complex landscape where the expectations of the movement’s supporters are high, and the risks of failure are significant.
From my perspective, this requires a clear and coherent strategy that balances the need for immediate action with the necessity of long-term planning. The movement’s success in toppling an autocratic regime was a significant achievement, but the real test lies in its ability to navigate the challenges of governance and build a more just and equitable Bangladesh.
One of the most important lessons that the movement must learn is the value of self-reflection. From abroad, I can see that the movement’s leaders must constantly ask themselves whether their actions are in line with the principles they espouse. Are they truly working to build a more just and equitable society, or are they merely replicating the power structures they fought to dismantle? This kind of self-reflection is not easy, but it is essential if the movement is to succeed in the long term.
Despite these challenges, I remain hopeful. The student movement in Bangladesh has already achieved so much, and I believe that it has the potential to achieve even more. But this will only happen if the movement’s leaders are willing to confront the challenges they face head-on.
They must be willing to make difficult decisions, to hold themselves and their members accountable, and to stay true to the principles that brought them this far.
I will continue to watch, to hope, and to support in whatever ways I can. I know that the road ahead will not be easy, but I believe that with the right leadership and a commitment to the principles that have defined the movement, the student movement in Bangladesh can lead our country toward a brighter, more equitable future.
I see our student movement standing at a crossroads. The internal conflicts at Chittagong University and the troubling incidents at Dhanmondi 32 highlight the challenges of leadership and organization that the movement must confront as it transitions from protest to governance. These challenges require a commitment to the principles of inclusivity, transparency, and accountability that have guided the movement thus far. By addressing these issues head-on and developing a clear strategy for the future, I believe the student movement can overcome these obstacles and continue to be a powerful force for positive change in Bangladesh. The road ahead is fraught with challenges, but with the right leadership and a commitment to the principles that have defined the movement, there is every reason to believe that the student movement can lead our country toward a brighter, more equitable future.
