Sheikh Hasina, the Prime Minister of Bangladesh, is a figure defined by her resilience and political acumen. However, her political journey is deeply rooted in a personal tragedy that has profoundly shaped her approach to leadership. The assassination of her father, Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, in 1975 by Bangladeshi rebel soldiers, marked the beginning of a relentless pursuit of power defined by vendettas and a quest for absolute control.
At the age of 28, Hasina lost not only her father but also most of her family in the massacre. This traumatic event indelibly etched a narrative in her mind: the nation of Bangladesh had betrayed and killed her father, the founding leader of the country. This perception has been a driving force in her political career, fueling a desire to exact revenge on those she holds responsible for her family’s demise.
Her supporters often refer to Hasina, the daughter of the country’s founding father, as the “mother of humanity.” While she has led Bangladesh on a track of robust economic growth since 2009, her government has been less forgiving towards its critics. Her tenure has been marred by allegations of suppressing dissent, curtailing freedom of speech, and using the state's machinery to consolidate power. These actions reflect a complex legacy shaped by her history of personal trauma and a fierce determination to maintain her grip on power.
Shaping a Narrative of Vengeance
Hasina’s trauma has informed a narrative that positions her as the guardian of her father's legacy, which she equates with the nation's destiny. Her political rivals and dissenters are often branded as extensions of the forces that betrayed her family. This perspective has justified her relentless pursuit of vendettas against perceived enemies, cementing her authority while polarizing the nation.
Sheikh Hasina is determined to uphold her late father's revered legacy as a national hero in Bangladesh's quest for independence. Despite this, Rahman, who was also known as Sheikh Mujib, transitioned into his own form of autocratic rule once he took charge of the newly formed country.
In 1975, just a year before his assassination, Rahman implemented a one-party system called Bakshal, similar to the Chinese Communist Party, by banning all political parties and most of the press. Critics claim that Hasina's actions have effectively created a modern-day Bakshal 2.0.
Despite the controversial circumstances, Hasina came to power through a more democratic process. At first, she stated her desire to retire at 60, but as she started her fifth term, her plans for who would take over became unclear. The power inheritance is speculated to go to either her son Sajeeb Wazed or her sister Sheikh Rehana.
In 1981, Hasina returned to Bangladesh from India after being elected president of the Awami League. The BNP's founder, President Ziaur Rahman, a military general, ruled Bangladesh at that time. Following Ziaur Rahman's assassination in a coup, another army general, Hussain Muhammad Ershad, seized power.
Hasina teamed up with Khaleda Zia, widow of Ziaur Rahman, to remove Ershad in a civilian mass movement. The affectionate title "Daughter of Democracy" was given to her, but it is seldom used today.
Hasina's boycott in 1996 led to the unopposed victory of the BNP. However, due to the persistent street demonstrations organized by Hasina, the BNP government was compelled to resign and initiate new elections to be conducted under a caretaker system. These elections marked Hasina's inaugural term as prime minister.. In her first term, there was a surge in party-connected gangsters, resulting in a decline in her popularity. Furthermore, she made a controversial move by striking a peace deal with ethnic insurgents in the Chittagong Hill Tracts.
While in opposition in 2001, the Awami League adopted a confrontational strategy, with Hasina's party being particularly known for its aggressive tactics like organizing frequent nationwide strikes and road blockades. She capitalized on problems such as rampant corruption, escalating inflation, and the emergence of post-9/11 Muslim extremism to garner sympathy from Western nations and the local press, which she now frequently mocks. Hasina has encountered multiple assassination attempts throughout her career, the most significant of which occurred in 2004 when she narrowly evaded a grenade attack.
In 2006, as the elections drew near, Hasina's party once again decided to boycott the polls. These events caused violent street clashes, ultimately resulting in a military intervention in 2007. After being arrested on corruption charges, she was freed in 2008 to run in the election, which she won by a wide margin.
Her new term faced significant challenges, including a 2009 mutiny by the country's border force.
This event is widely believed among opponents of Hasina's party and government to have been an orchestrated move by Hasina herself. Critics argue that the mutiny provided a convenient pretext for her to remove any potential army officials who might pose a threat to her rule through a future coup. This belief is rooted in the suspicion that Hasina used the turmoil to strengthen her grip on power by eliminating or sidelining military personnel who were not loyal to her, thereby securing her position against any possible internal military dissent.
Additionally, she created a tribunal to bring Jamaat leaders to trial for their alleged involvement in war crimes during the 1971 independence war. Despite being criticized for their flaws, these trials resulted in the issuance of several death penalties, further dividing the country. Hasina also confronted difficulties from Hefazat-e-Islam, a Muslim pressure group, utilizing a combination of coercion and concessions.
Reports of enforced disappearances and extrajudicial killings saw a surge, specifically during a 2018 crackdown on drugs that led to the deaths of over 400 people.
During the same year, the government enforced more severe internet regulations, greatly limiting the ability to freely express opinions. Amidst accusations of electoral fraud, Hasina's party defied expectations and secured a majority in the 2018 elections, enabling her to remain in power.
Through a January election this year, she managed to hold onto power despite a significant lack of competition due to a boycott by the main opposition party. With the victory on January 7, her government secured its fourth consecutive term in power and fifth overall.
“If I’ve made any mistakes along the way, my request to you will be to look at the matter with the eyes of forgiveness,” Hasina told the nation in a televised address on the eve of the end of official campaigning for Bangladesh’s 12th general election.
“If I can form the government again, I will get a chance to correct the mistakes. Give me an opportunity to serve you by voting for the ‘Boat’ in the January 7 election,” she said, referring to her party’s symbol.
A Long String of Vendettas
The Battle of the Begums
Khaleda Zia, the leader of the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP), has been a primary target of Hasina's vendettas.The rivalry between Hasina and Zia, often referred to as the “Battle of the Begums,” has been marked by a series of legal battles, imprisonments, and public condemnations. Hasina has utilized her authority to marginalize Zia and her followers, frequently depicting them as remnants of the deceitful entities that were responsible for her father's murder. Zia is currently serving a lengthy prison sentence on corruption charges, which has further marginalized her as a political figure and emphasizes Hasina's commitment to retaining control.
The relationship between Sheikh Hasina, the leader of the Awami League (AL), and Khaleda Zia, the leader of the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP), has been strained ever since Ziaur Rahman, Zia's husband, took office as the President of Bangladesh in the late 1970s.
Rahman, who was accused of assassinating Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, the father of Hasina and the founder of Bangladesh, emerged as a key player in the power struggle. This connection has reinforced Hasina's view of Zia as an embodiment of the forces that betrayed her family.
The rivalry between Hasina and Zia grew stronger as both women gained prominence in the 1990s. Zia, who assumed office as Prime Minister in 1991, presented a political alternative to Hasina's persistent pursuit of justice for her father's assassination. While Zia was in power, Hasina's opposition tenure was marred by accusations of corruption, electoral fraud, and mismanagement against the BNP-led government.
Bangladesh experienced a consistent change in governance between 1991 and 2006 as power shifted back and forth between Hasina's Awami League (AL) and Zia's BNP. This competition helped avoid some of the worst abuses of power, with both parties claiming aspects of Bangladesh's founding myth. Hasina became more aggressive during her second term in power in 2009.
Hasina's revenge drive was both personal and political. She challenged Zia's legitimacy and leadership, accusing her of continuing her father's assassins' legacy.
This narrative was central to Hasina's political campaigns, portraying her as the protector of her father's legacy and the true patriot of Bangladesh.
Legal battles and political maneuvers reflect the rivalry between Hasina and Zia. HHasina's government targets Zia and allies with judiciary. Notable cases include Zia's 2018 conviction on politically motivated corruption charges.
Khaleda Zia's legal persecution is part of Hasina's vendetta. Zia received a seven-year prison sentence in 2018 for embezzlement, a verdict denounced as politically motivated. This case sidelined Zia from politics and strengthened Hasina's power.
Many people see Hasina's decision to extend Zia's imprisonment to cover multiple corruption cases as a calculated move to eliminate her primary political opponent and weaken the BNP.
The ongoing feud between Awami League and BNP has fueled a strong divide, leading to violent clashes among their followers. Both sides have been accusing each other of political violence and electoral fraud.
The ongoing conflict has also resulted in a culture of political intolerance in Bangladesh. Accusations of stifling dissent and undermining democracy have been made against Hasina's government. The legal actions and suppression of BNP supporters serve to solidify Hasina's power.
The media shapes public perception of the Hasina-Zia feud. Bangladeshi state media portrays Hasina as a defender of democracy and national unity, and Zia and her party as corrupt and anti-national.
International observers condemn the imprisonment of Zia and the crackdown on her supporters as part of a broader pattern of authoritarianism and political repression.
The fierce rivalry between Hasina and Zia embodies the dynastic nature of Bangladeshi politics. They both emphasize their family's role in Bangladesh's liberation struggle while downplaying the other's contributions.
Hasina mocks the BNP as a "terrorist party" that rejects democracy, emphasizing its formation by a former junta.
She emphasizes BNP supporters' violent acts in arson attacks, while the BNP claims party repression and fabricated charges against its leaders.
The Crusade against War Criminals
Hasina initiated the International Crimes Tribunal for prosecuting war crimes. The tribunal was deeply flawed, compromising defendants' rights and susceptible to political interference. Several defendants, including a close adviser to Zia, were hanged by the tribunal, effectively eliminating the leadership of BNP's coalition partner, Jamaat-e-Islami.
The executions of former Bangladeshi army officers reflected dynastic rivalry. Hasina's push for these executions aimed to avenge her family's murder and cement her legacy.
The International Crimes Tribunal lost credibility due to concerns about its independence and political motivations. Critics claim the tribunal is a tool for Hasina to eliminate political rivals, resulting in execution of senior Jamaat-e-Islami leaders. The tribunal's impartiality and potential for abuse of power were concerning.
International bodies like the United Nations and Human Rights Watch criticized the pattern of criminal convictions against opposition leaders.
Organizations worry that Bangladesh is becoming a pseudo-democracy, with authoritarian practices disguised as democracy.
Opposition leaders' executions and convictions are part of a strategy to marginalize and weaken political opponents, strengthening Hasina's rule.
The execution of Motiur Rahman Nizami, the leader of Jamaat-e-Islami, in 2016 shed light on the disputed nature of the tribunal due to his conviction for war crimes, genocide, and rape. International observers condemned the tribunal for lacking evidence, impartiality, and human rights violations. Nizami's execution, along with other opposition leaders, sought to silence dissent and consolidate power.
The Feud with Professor Yunus
In addition to her political rivals, Hasina holds a grudge against individuals such as Professor Muhammad Yunus, the Nobel Laureate and Grameen Bank founder. Yunus, once celebrated for his contributions to microfinance and poverty alleviation, fell out of favor with Hasina due to his increasing popularity and potential as a political alternative. HDue to his close ties with influential figures in America, he was seen as a threat to Hasina's power.
The ongoing conflict between Hasina and Yunus escalated further due to the construction of the Padma Bridge. In June 2022, during the bridge's grand opening, Hasina spoke about its significance as a representation of national pride and self-sustainability, while also using the occasion to target Yunus. She blamed him for causing the World Bank to pull its funding from the project by making untrue claims of corruption. It was evident to everyone who she meant, without directly mentioning Yunus.
In a speech, she suggested that Yunus should be "plunged into the Padma river twice," a threat that highlighted the personal nature of her vendetta.
Hasina's accusations include Yunus' business ventures too. The Bangladesh Anti-Corruption Commission is investigating embezzlement by Grameen Telecom, associated with Yunus.The government accused Grameen Telecom of embezzlement, which the company denies.This investigation is believed to be part of Hasina's strategy to weaken Yunus and remove him as a potential competitor.
In over 40 years, Grameen Bank has given $37 billion in loans to 10 million of the world's poorest people. Yunus, the bank's founder, remembers lending $5 to a woman near his university. Lending with loose repayment understanding gave rise to the microcredit movement. Grameen Bank's microcredit model has reached over 100 countries, helping minority women with a repayment rate above 99%.
Even with his achievements and worldwide acclaim, such as receiving the Nobel Peace Prize in 2006, Yunus has been continuously targeted by the judicial system under Hasina's administration.
International figures and organizations have expressed strong criticism for the treatment of Yunus, who is facing several charges including forgery, money laundering, and embezzlement.Over 170 prominent figures from around the world, such as former US President Barack Obama and former UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, have joined together to advocate for an end to the legal persecution he is facing.
It seems that Hasina's animosity towards Yunus is driven by both personal envy and political competition. She harbors a strong desire to attain the Nobel Peace Prize, and considers Yunus as a political adversary.
Despite Yunus's consistent denial of having any political aspirations, Hasina has never forgiven him for his short-lived involvement in politics in 2007, when he established a political party with the aim of addressing corruption and polarization.
How an Army of Loyalists Keep Hasina in Power
Very few leaders possess the level of resilience that Hasina has demonstrated in the face of multiple assassination attempts. It is clear that she is determined to remain in power, as evidenced by her ability to survive 19 attempts. These incidents have reinforced her resolve and vindicated, according to her perspective, the severe security measures and political repression she employs.
Hasina’s consolidation of power has been facilitated by an army of sycophants and loyal yes-men who ensure her grip on authority remains unchallenged. These loyalists, rewarded with patronage and impunity, have helped her entrench her rule while stifling dissent. The judiciary, long seen as loyal to Hasina, has played a crucial role in this dynamic, often ruling in favor of the government and against political opponents.
The reliance on a loyalist network has allowed Hasina to maintain a façade of stability while suppressing opposition.
Her ministers and advisers consistently defend her actions, claiming they are necessary to protect infrastructure and maintain the rule of law. This narrative, combined with the systematic dismantling of opposition forces, has enabled Hasina to present herself as the indispensable leader of Bangladesh.
In 2018, students' protests led Hasina to cancel the quota system via an executive order. However, in June 2024, the High Court reinstated it, prompting renewed protests.
The students believe that the judiciary is under Hasina's control, and the reintroduction of the quota is a strategic move to consolidate her power.
Sheikh Hasina has been accused of forging fake freedom fighter certificates to ensure loyalty among her cronies, effectively creating a cadre of loyal civil servants. She wanted the quotas returned to reward her support base, which she couldn't offer much due to the economic crunch.
How Hasina is Handling the Student Protests
Hasina's response to the protests reflects her approach to dissent. The protests, which initially began as a peaceful opposition to the government’s job reservation quotas, were met with brutal crackdowns by security forces and vigilantes from Hasina’s party. The violent suppression killed almost 200 people, highlighting Hasina's resolve to maintain her power. The government’s use of military and paramilitary forces, communication blackouts, and curfews highlighted her willingness to use extreme measures to maintain control.
Amid growing unease in the export-dependent economy, triggered by a prolonged internet shutdown and a nationwide transportation blackout, Hasina summoned a group of business tycoons on Monday to reassure them of her control over the situation.
“We have already managed to bring it under considerable control,” Hasina told the businessmen. “The situation will gradually improve further. As it gets better, the curfew will also be relaxed.” However, for her political opponents, whom she squarely blames for the latest crisis, Hasina promised even more stringent actions, asserting, “It won’t be let go so easily this time.”
Despite describing how her government demonstrated tolerance amid incidents of violence and unrest at Dhaka University, Hasina refrained from blaming the students directly. Instead, she pointed fingers at the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) and its allies, asserting that ordinary students “could not have committed such destruction,” a narrative increasingly promoted by her supporters.
Within the country, Hasina has depended on the military to handle the turmoil. General Waker-uz-Zaman, who is related to Hasina, has been instrumental in this endeavor. He examined the troops stationed outside the National Parliament buildings and confidently declared that the situation had shown marked improvement within 48 hours of the military being deployed. In spite of this, there have been videos surfacing that demonstrate troops engaging in gunfire with protestors, signifying a notable intensification in the government's response.
Journalist David Bergman has provided insightful analysis into how Hasina might handle the ongoing protests and the outlook for her reign amidst this turmoil. Bergman states that Hasina's strategy involves facing the crisis head-on and placing blame on the opposition. Over time, the Awami League government has been able to suppress dissent by detaining thousands of opposition activists, effectively hindering their capacity to mobilize protests.
According to Bergman, more than 1,400 individuals have been apprehended by the police, including high-ranking members of the opposition parties BNP and Jamaat-e-Islami. Additionally, 61,000 individuals have been charged with acts of violence. This tactic enables the government to arrest anyone and label them as troublemakers or threats.
Unlike previous protests, the current ones involve a wider range of people, including students. Suppressing dissent solely through mass arrests becomes more difficult. Bergman suggests the government might struggle to justify arresting many students without backlash.
Bergman points out that the Awami League government is unlikely to resign of their own accord. Without a powerful civil society, there is no incentive for it to resign.
The military may intervene to avoid chaos, according to Bergman. It could involve the government resigning and temporary takeover, leading to free and fair elections.
Bergman notes that the army's loyalty to the Awami League may be strained if they're ordered to shoot at students and civilians, causing tensions between leaders and junior officers. Videos have surfaced of men in military attire shooting at protesters, despite reported dissent from junior officers regarding the orders.
The already complex situation is made even more intricate by India's considerable sway over the Bangladesh army leadership. This influence has led to support for the Awami League and a nod to the army's current involvement on the streets.
The Way Forward
The ongoing protests in Bangladesh are a pivotal moment that poses a significant challenge to the stability and legitimacy of Hasina's government. The success of these protests, as pointed out by David Bergman, relies on how well the government can handle dissent, the allegiance of the military, and the broader political dynamics in the country. It is still uncertain if Hasina can successfully navigate this crisis and retain her hold on power, but her legacy will undoubtedly be influenced by her approach to these major challenges.
