It is necessary to exercise caution in arriving at Indo-centric conclusions without empirical evidence. We need to understand the true motivations so as to better be able to prepare for what may follow
Deb Mukharji
The precise sequence of events leading to Sheikh Hasina’s resignation as prime minister of Bangladesh and departure for India on August 5 may not be available, but it appears to have followed the reluctance of the army to try and forcibly interdict the oncoming mass of people, as may have been the wish of the prime minister. This left no option for her but to relinquish office and, as insisted upon by family, seek safety outside Bangladesh. In Nepal, too, in April 2006, the Royal Nepal Army refused to fire on fellow citizens, leading to the political retreat and eventual abdication of the king.
Several factors coalesced in reaching the outcome on August 5. The previous three national elections, in 2024, 2018, and 2014, with virtually no Opposition participation and charges of manipulation, resulted in massive victories for the Awami League. While the government could rightly claim that this year’s election was held under existing rules, the absence of any Opposition left many people questioning its legitimacy. The economic performance of the government was commendable, and Bangladesh was poised to become a middle-income country by 2026, its per capita GDP already exceeding India’s. But the government was seen to be restrictive towards press freedom and the West, in particular, raised questions of human rights violations, notably against the Rapid Action Battalion. There were charges of widespread corruption. For some time now, observers felt that the government had distanced itself from the people…..
https://www.hindustantimes.com/opinion/what-explains-the-bangladesh-crisis-101723045545313.html
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
P. B. Mehta – Violence and communalism: South Asia’s disturbing commonality
After the truth-shower 