Bangladesh after Sheikh Hasina: What India has failed to see

One year since Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina was ousted in a popular uprising, Bangladesh faces a complex storm of instability.

From a fragile interim leadership under Nobel laureate Muhammad Yunus to the return of Islamist groups and an overwhelmed military, in an interview with The Federal, journalist Subir Bhaumik tells K S Dakshina Murthy how India miscalculated, and why the region is now teetering on the brink.

How do you view India’s diplomatic trajectory since the fall of Sheikh Hasina?

New Delhi was completely caught off guard. I can confirm, from sources close to Hasina, that even on the morning she fled, Indian security and foreign affairs officials had no clue she would seek refuge in India. We had grown complacent, lulled into a comfort zone because we had a friendly regime in Dhaka.

Hasina was seen as a dependable ally, much like her father.

When such a regime collapses overnight, it rattles even the strongest establishments. There was no Plan B.

Also read: Bangladesh demands Hasina's return; what are India's options?

India had put all its eggs in Hasina’s basket—and frankly, we didn't have other baskets. Bangladesh’s politics is deeply polarised. On one side, you have secular Bengali nationalism largely represented by the army; on the other, radical Islamist forces, some of whom actively opposed the 1971 liberation war.

These Islamist parties, such as Bangladesh Jamaat-e-Islami and Samajwadi Islami, have gained strength under Yunus’s interim government. Although, Yunus is not an Islamist himself, he needed to counter the Awami League, which had persecuted him. To do so, he turned to their enemies—many with deeply Islamist agendas.

India has had issues with the BNP before. Is the situation different now?

Yes, India tried to engage the BNP back in 2001. National Security Advisor Brajesh Mishra even said we shouldn't rely solely on Hasina. But what followed? The 10-truck arms haul in Chittagong. These weapons were meant for both local jihadist groups like Jamaat-ul-Mujahideen Bangladesh and India-focused groups like ULFA. One of their leaders, Paresh Baruah, got a life sentence.

This cemented New Delhi’s mistrust in the BNP. After Hasina returned to power in 2009, India was back in its comfort zone. Again, no Plan B was developed. And now, we are paying the price.

Has India’s relationship with Bangladesh ever been worse?

Unfortunately, our relationship with Bangladesh has always been regime-specific. China, on the other hand, is more pragmatic. They engaged Hasina when she was in power, and now they’re courting the BNP and Jamaat. For Beijing, it’s about interest, not ideology.

India, due to historical and emotional baggage from 1971, has always been more sentimental. Whenever the Awami League is in power, ties are strong. When others govern, relations sour—especially when Pakistan-friendly figures like Tarique Rahman are involved.

Yunus’s closeness with Islamist radicals is deeply worrying. Convicted extremists from the Chittagong arms case, like Major General Zahur Haider Chowdhury, are being freed. Chowdhury even spent 12 days in China recently—hardly a vacation.

This has set off alarm bells in Delhi.

Also read: Awami League resistance turns deadly as Bangladesh govt’s political push falters

What are the two biggest challenges for India in the current situation?

First, Sheikh Hasina is now in India, which the opposition in Bangladesh sees as a provocation.

Second, the Awami League is banned from political activity. Whether temporary or not, it cripples Bangladesh’s largest secular political force and undermines India’s influence.

Even if the Awami League survives the ban, history shows recovery takes time. After the 1975 coup, it took them 21 years to return. After losing in 2001, they came back after eight.

Meanwhile, law and order under Yunus has collapsed. Corruption is rampant. Business people say bribes have increased fivefold. Mob justice is common.

Yunus lacks administrative experience, and his youth backers are deeply involved in extortion.

Is there clarity on when elections will be held?

None at all. Yunus has been ambivalent. He mentioned early February, before Ramadan, but always with caveats. He claims elections depend on successful reforms—something only a parliament, not an unelected interim government, has the mandate to carry out.

He also lacks strong backing from the BNP. His real support lies with Jamaat and newer Islamist groups like the National Citizens’ Party (NCP), some with roots in Hizb-ut-Tahrir. He’s aiming to craft a coalition that gives them 100 of 300 seats and make himself the next President.

That would grant him policy control without day-to-day responsibilities—and crucially, immunity from prosecution for past allegations.

Also read: Why should Sheikh Hasina submit to a sham tribunal in Bangladesh?

Is Bangladesh at risk of slipping into anarchy?

It already has. Thousands of police officers have been killed with impunity. Respected academics are calling this a “mobocracy”.

In one case, a school principal was forced to resign by an angry mob. Only the army has resisted such lawlessness.

Meanwhile, the economic situation is deteriorating. The garments sector—80 per cent relies on export income—is shrinking. Factories are shutting down. Female garment workers, many of whom once symbolised empowerment, are now reportedly engaging in survival sex work.

Minorities—Hindus, Buddhists, even Sufi Muslims—are being targeted. Over 100 Sufi shrines have been vandalised.

This is a dangerous shift from Bangladesh’s historically syncretic form of Islam to a hardline Salafi model.

Do you see any way out of this crisis?

Only if elections are held—and soon. And if they are inclusive. Banning the Awami League is akin to banning the Congress post-Emergency. It’s absurd. No election can be truly representative without the country’s biggest party.

The interim government must facilitate elections, not push through constitutional reforms. General Waker, the army chief, understands this. He’s a professional soldier, not a power-hungry opportunist. He wants elections by December so the army can return to barracks.

He has said clearly: Bengali people don’t accept long military rule. Even if they welcome the army initially, they will turn against it. Waker doesn’t want that.

Could the army intervene if things worsen?

Yes—if widespread unrest breaks out. The army has already had to open fire in Gopalganj after clashes over the NCP’s attempt to desecrate Sheikh Mujib’s resting place. Four or five civilians died.

This hurt the army’s image. But if the chaos continues, they may have no choice but to step in and prevent total collapse.

Right now, Bangladesh is at a crossroads. A lot will depend on how the next few months play out.

The content above has been generated using a fine-tuned AI model. To ensure accuracy, quality, and editorial integrity, we employ a Human-In-The-Loop (HITL) process. While AI assists in creating the initial draft, our experienced editorial team carefully reviews, edits, and refines the content before publication. At The Federal, we combine the efficiency of AI with the expertise of human editors to deliver reliable and insightful journalism.