Old fears about a possible 'break up' of Bangladesh following a violent civil war have revived strongly, as frenzied pro-Awami League demonstrations and widespread arson disrupted normal life today (November 18).
Trouble began in 12 districts in Bangladesh, even before the death penalty against former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina was announced. Both sides, the banned Awami League (AL) and the Dr M Yunus-led interim government, were prepared for the eruption of political turbulence that began spreading over larger areas in different districts after sunset.
Violence on streets
Caught on the back foot, the interim government called in the army in some areas to restore normalcy. Hordes of slogan shouting mobs, armed with sticks, stones, grenades and small arms, clashed repeatedly with AL supporters. Police and para military units swung into action as government offices were set aflame by AL activists in many areas.
Cars and shops were torched. The number of casualties could not be ascertained as the violence continued, keeping the police on their toes throughout the day.
Targeted assaults
One interesting feature was the renewed attacks made by armed youths targeting late Prime Minister Sheikh Mujib's ancestral Dhanmondi residence in Dhaka. This was the work of pro-government roughnecks, who were deployed as a private army by the administration, to fight off the pro-AL mobs.
There was no official explanation about such a targeted assault against former AL leaders and freedom fighters, whose houses were partially or wholly destroyed after the August 5, 2025 coup itself!
It appeared that the AL side had their 'informers' among the Jamaat-e-Islami activists and the BNP. For shortly before the International Crimes Tribunal (ICT) declared that Hasina had ordered the army to open fire against the opposition protesters on August 5, there came a statement from Hasina herself. In this she pointedly denied the accusation of ordering the army to open fire!
"This suggested that the Awami League had come to know that Hasina would be accused of misusing the army in the charge sheet against her,'' said a Dhaka correspondent.
Turbulent history
'Dhaka-based observers said that by seeking army help on the very first day of the AL protests, the Yunus-led government had gone into a retreat before the pro-Hasina onslaught. According to them, the interim government's position was politically compromised as Dr Yunus had accused the ousted Awami League government of frequently resorting to using the army against protestors.
Yet, now, his government had called in the army on the very first day of the Awami League's agitation, they pointed out.
Regarding the possible 'break up' of Bangladesh, Dhaka-based analysts pointed to the turbulent history of the region. India actively sponsored the birth of Bangladesh during 1971-72, but democracy took much longer to strike roots in Bangladesh. During its early evolution, Bangladesh, like Pakistan was frequently taken over by the army.
Elected leaders too maintained good relations, if not actually hobnobbed with powerful elements in the army.
AL vs BNP
Even more intriguing was the unusually vitriolic relationship between the two major parties, the more established AL and the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP).
No two parties could be more dissimilar. The AL had a major role in Pakistani politics and it boasted of a long tradition of dealing with bigger democratic parties, including the Congress before 1947. AL leaders were familiar with towering figures like Jawaharlal Nehru and Mohammad Ali Jinnah.
As for the BNP, it was founded by the late Gen Ziaur Rahman, whose elevation as the army Chief in Bangladesh involved much intrigue and plotting within the armed forces, as had happened in Pakistan. The BNP did not originate as a democratic political force with a tradition of mass contact with the people neither did it have a brief stint in political activism.
Therefore, the working relationship between the AL and BNP always remained uneasy, as they operated on different wavelengths.
The AL too had ruled in Bangladesh for somewhat a longer period than the BNP which won general elections in Bangladesh twice.
The AL still had leaders like Abul Mansar Ahmed and the late Mujibur Rahman, who had been in close contact with Nehru, Gandhi and Morarji Desai. The BNP had hardly any leader of that stature and experience and the raison d'etre of its existence was to oppose the AL and all it stood for - secularism, a neutral foreign policy and a liberal education system.
The AL, moreover, understood the significance of maintaining a good relationship with India and other countries in its neighbourhood. The BNP opposed this stance and insisted on not being pro-Indian. It preferred to align more with Pakistan and other Islamic countries and to go against India, the party even courted China and the US.
Big fight
So far so bad. But these two parties are so unlike and mutually antagonistic they have constantly sought to suppress if not totally wipe out each other. Net outcome: both parties tried to finish off each other whenever they are in power!
Both parties have encouraged volatile sections in the country like students, workers and peasants, the majority of them being very poor in comparison to their counterparts in neighbouring countries. Industries ceased to function, long strikes disrupted normal work in ports and educational institutions faced long deadlock.
While generally warm relations continued between India and the AL, the BNP wooed Pakistan China and Islamic extremists. But since AL had somehow ruled for a longer period, the BNP suffered a relative decline. Still it has managed to retain the support of Western countries, Pakistan and China.
Can Bangladesh split up?
So what has all this to do with a 'break up' of Bangladesh, as feared by many Bangladeshi leaders/analysts?
By way of answer, it can be seen how India has not responded very warmly to the interim government, while Pakistan and China have been more responsive. Notably, the AL despite being banned, enjoys major support in many districts.
In case armed clashes and confrontations break out frequently between AL supporters, who dominate several districts and activists and the BNP and Jamaat-e-Islami, which had opposed India and the freedom struggle in 1971-72, the chances of a civil war within Bangladesh would be imminent.
The fragmentation of the entity called Bangladesh looks far more imminent than before, especially as big power rivalry, has become a factor of Bangladesh politics of late as Russia, China, Turkey, the US and the EU are all keenly involved in developments in Bangladesh. Moreover, given the recent trends, they would not mind if India grew weaker in the region and a fragmented Bangladesh gets sucked into the growing chaos and confusion in an otherwise stable South Asia.
The fears expressed by Bangladeshi scholars and analysts cannot be dismissed lightly.
