Restless Bangladesh! Is the Turbulent Student Movement an Echo of Iran’s Islamic Revolution?

Restless Bangladesh! Is the Turbulent Student Movement an Echo of Iran’s Islamic Revolution?
Biplab Pal, July 18, 2024

Bangladesh's trains and buses have come to a standstill. The number of students injured in clashes and admitted to hospitals is rising. Colleges and universities are closed. The issue at hand is the anti-quota movement.

Sixty percent of government jobs in Bangladesh are reserved. Among this, 30% is reserved for the families of freedom fighters. The students have taken to the streets primarily to abolish this 30% quota!

But is that the real reason, or just a pretext? Is there actually a foreign power trying to use this opportunity to oust Hasina and establish an Islamic Republic of Bangladesh in the style of Iran?

A bit of history and arithmetic makes it clear that the anti-quota movement is just an excuse. In reality, the opposition forces against Hasina are uniting to remove her.

There are only 1.37 million government jobs in Bangladesh. The country's population is 180 million. If you consider the working-age population, less than 1% hold government jobs. If you compare the number of graduates to government job openings, only one in 200 graduates will get a government job. The process is not transparent; bribery and exam leaks are rampant, just like in India.

Salaries in Bangladeshi government jobs are not particularly good. Yet, everyone is desperate for a government job because of corruption and bribery. A peon’s monthly salary might be thirty thousand taka, but you will find their children studying in Canada and owning three large houses. Government jobs in Bangladesh are a guaranteed path to wealth. They share the spoils of looting the country. There are areas in America and Canada where only Bangladeshis live. Their wives and children live there, attending American schools. These areas are called "Begum Para." The husbands are government employees in Bangladesh.

Maybe one in a hundred will get a government job, but it is the surest path to becoming wealthy in Bangladesh. Hence, there will inevitably be fights and clashes over these jobs.

The government had abolished this 30% quota in 2018. Freedom fighters took the matter to the High Court, which reinstated it. The government appealed to the Supreme Court to overturn the ruling. The government is not in favor of maintaining this quota. But according to the constitution, they must wait for the Supreme Court's verdict. Therefore, the anti-government movement lacks logic in this context. Yet, it is happening.

The main reason is the widespread anger against Sheikh Hasina's authoritarianism. Here, I see shadows of Iran.

Under Reza Shah Pahlavi, Iran’s economy surpassed England’s and spread across Europe. However, all this wealth was concentrated among the 1-2% loyal to Reza Shah. The remaining 99% did not taste this prosperity. Consequently, the disenfranchised united with the mullahs and the leftists. Together, they ousted Reza Shah. Within a year of the revolution, the mullahs killed all the leftist leaders, taking 100% control in Iran.

Bangladesh is heading in that direction. Reza Shah Pahlavi was under American protection. Iran flourished with American investment and cooperation. Similarly, Hasina is under Indian protection. Under her leadership, Bangladesh has made significant progress in the past 15 years, surpassing India in many areas. But the cream of this progress has been enjoyed by the Awami League’s people. The remaining 99% are left out of this prosperity. One percent of Bangladeshis go to India or Europe for shopping, while the remaining 99% struggle to make ends meet. The anger against Hasina is intense, but all democratic avenues to express this anger are blocked. Bangladesh is sitting on a powder keg, needing just a spark to ignite.

However, Hasina will not face the same situation as Reza Shah Pahlavi, because at that time, the Democrats were in power in America, and they did not support Shah in crushing the movement. In this case, Hasina will receive full cooperation from Modi's government. India cannot risk losing Hasina.

To the progressive Bangladeshis who are joining this anti-Hasina movement with Shibir and Jamaat, I say, read the history of Iran. If Hasina falls, within six months, either you will flee to India, or your bodies will be lying in Bangladesh.

Finally, let me share a conversation between Tajuddin and Sheikh Mujib on August 12, 1975. I heard this from Tajuddin's daughter, Sharmin Ahmed. Tajuddin was then outside the cabinet. He had resigned, unable to tolerate Sheikh Mujib's autocracy. Sheikh Mujib was confused, surrounded by enemies, and people were starving. He wanted to bring Tajuddin back into the cabinet. Tajuddin told him, "Sheikh Saheb, people can tolerate hunger if they have an outlet to vent their anger. You have blocked that path too! Where will their anger go? If they cannot remove you democratically, they will try to remove you with bullets." Needless to say, that's what happened two days later.

Sheikh Hasina should remember that the British created the Indian National Congress as a safety valve for the people’s anger. To sustain autocracy for long, you need an opposition, even if it is a controlled one. Otherwise, unrest will ignite without any issue. No one would have shot Sheikh Mujibur Rahman if he had left a democratic path open to remove him. Learn from your father's death and at least open a safety valve for anger. Beating and killing protesters will only intensify the movement. You know this. You indirectly said this in your address to the nation today. But will your people believe you if you don't create space for opposition?

The anger of the 99% is very dangerous. During a period of peace, Yudhishthira asked Vidura why people rebel against the king. Vidura said, "O King, when the king’s councilors plunder the state’s wealth with the king’s support, and the people remain poor, that inequality makes the subjects rebellious." That is what is happening in Bangladesh.

The Future of Bangladesh: Echoes of Uncertainty

 The Future of Bangladesh: Echoes of Uncertainty

Biplab Pal, July 20

(This article is long. However, you might want to save it for later. If my predictions about the next twenty years in this region come true, you should be cautious. Share this to warn others.)

(1) A Peaceful Bangladesh - Is It Just a Dream?

The biggest problem with our mindset is that we grew up in a period of peace. We have matured in a historical time when there have been very few wars globally.

Following the back-to-back world wars, the entire civilization became much more peace-seeking. Those of us who grew up in India have lived through a relatively politically peaceful period. Because democracy has functioned in this region, specifically in India. Power transitions have been peaceful.

The Liberation War of 1971, when Bangladesh gained independence, was a significant war in the post-World War II era. It was the largest war in the past 100 years of India's history. However, it's doubtful whether the firepower used in the 15-day India-Pakistan war of 1971 matches the destruction seen in just a few hours of the World War II Operation Barbarossa.

We have assumed that this peaceful world, where we have democratic rights and our homes and families are protected by the state’s military and police, is the norm.

We think that is how it always is! We think that our families and homes being destroyed by war is unthinkable.

Even though during Partition, Bengalis lost their homes to riots and became refugees. But that was a short-lived past. The younger generations have forgotten this. We assume civilization has progressed to a point where war won't happen. Our lives, property, and everything are secure.

Maps of India and Bangladesh are secure. As if these countries existed thousands of years ago and will remain for thousands of years more!

The pieces on the chessboard of time have not moved for a while. We assume the game is over! There are no more moves!

(2) Can Bangladesh Remain Geographically Independent?

The biggest outcome of World War II was that several countries were created solely by the will of America and the Soviet superpowers. In 1944, they divided their list of subordinate states.

Many countries were born in this peace period. There are many such countries in the world whose independent existence should not have been possible by geographical rules. Examples include Taiwan. The most significant example is East and West Pakistan.

You might say, why the will of superpowers? Wasn't Pakistan a demand of Indian Muslims?

These are incorrect histories taught in Indian and Pakistani schools. There is extensive research on these topics. The real truth can be found in the first volume of my book on the history of Partition. Indian Muslims did not want Pakistan. In the 1937 elections, the Muslim League received only 3% of the vote. When Muslims rejected him, Jinnah was deeply saddened. He retired from politics and moved to London. In Bengal, Muslim votes went to the Krishak Praja Party. In Pakistan, they went to various local parties like the Unionist Party. But why did these two parties merge with the Muslim League? What role did British intelligence play? Why were Muslim leaders who opposed Partition assassinated? No one asked these questions. In India, Muslims were blamed for Partition, and in Pakistan, it was considered a war victory. The actual game played by British intelligence remained hidden.

I have written about this extensive history in my book.

Anyway, look at the geography of Bangladesh. You will see history within that geography.

At birth, Pakistan was a surprising country with 2000 miles of India separating its two parts. Fortunately, India's Prime Minister at the time was Jawaharlal Nehru, an idealist and anti-war advocate. In 1947-48, he had two opportunities to reunite India, but he feared war and bloodshed. As a result, an unnatural geographical country named Pakistan survived. A country where the state language was Urdu, but only 1% of people in East and West Pakistan knew Urdu. Who were the rulers of this country? Elite Muslims from India! They had no connection with the Bengalis, Sindhis, or Pathans of Pakistan. The country survived through military rule and American aid.

But why 1971? Why did it take 24 years to break Pakistan in two? East Pakistan made the security of India's seven northeastern states shaky. If China and East Pakistan captured the 17 km Siliguri Chicken Neck, the seven states would be isolated from India. This Chicken Neck is India's most vulnerable security point. The Indian military knew this, but Nehru did not consider it. His dream was of Hindi-Chini Bhai Bhai! By the time of the 1962 war, when China was close to capturing the Chicken Neck, Nehru realized that ideals are not believed by anyone. If that part of East Pakistan was not with India, there would be no security for Northeast India. The 1962 Indo-China war and the 1964 India-Pakistan war made it clear that without separating East Pakistan, it would be impossible to hold Northeast India. This was when the Research and Analysis Wing (RAW) was born. Its first major mission was to create Bangladesh by collaborating with the Awami League. Nehru was an idealist, but Indira Gandhi believed in realpolitik. Thus came 1971. It took Congress 24 years to understand the pain of the Chicken Neck.

Bangladesh became independent. But can a country surrounded by a large one like India maintain an independent foreign policy or military? European history shows that it is not possible. There is no precedent in world history where a country surrounded by a large nation has maintained an independent foreign policy. No large state has ever allowed it. In all cases, such a country either becomes a subordinate state or remains as a protectorate country. For example, the Caribbean or West Indies islands. These countries are subordinate to either America or Britain. Their military protection is the responsibility of America. Venezuela cannot attack Guyana because Guyana is now under American protection. The only exception is Cuba, which was first a Spanish colony, then gained independence with American help and was under American protection until the Communist revolution, after which it came under Soviet protection.

RAW's founder Kao Saheb knew this well. He advised Indira Gandhi to make a deal with Sheikh Mujib to ensure Bangladesh does not maintain a military, relying on India for protection. Indira Gandhi did not prioritize this. It is said that she believed whether Bangladesh had a military or not was the same. Indira Gandhi was confident that Bangladesh would not become an enemy of India for what she had done for it. But Indira was proven wrong by 1975. Anti-India forces blew up Sheikh Mujib and his family. From 1975-1991, Bangladesh was completely under anti-India forces. The bases of Northeast separatist militants were in Bangladesh. Why did Indira and her son Rajiv not intervene? Why did they allow anti-India BNP to grow?

The main reason was India's weak economy. The military was in poor condition due to low dollar reserves. There was no money to buy weapons. There were separatist movements all around. India was busy handling Pakistan, Kashmir, and Punjab. India did not notice that Bangladesh was becoming another Pakistan.

India was alerted during the 2001-2006 BNP rule in Bangladesh. Khaleda Zia openly made Bangladesh a pasture for Pakistan's ISI. Dhaka was becoming the center of every anti-India terror operation.

India was no longer the same India. Due to the 1991 reforms, dollar reserves had increased manifold. BJP had come to power. The Kargil war made India realize it needed to significantly boost its military strength. Therefore, a pro-India government in Bangladesh became a priority for Delhi. First, India supported the 2006-8 caretaker government. Then, due to Delhi’s longstanding relationship with Sheikh Hasina, India decided to strengthen her position and destroy anti-India forces like BNP.

Simultaneously, India's national capitals like Tata, Ambani, and Adani began increasing their investments in Bangladesh. Previously, Indian capital was almost absent in Bangladesh. But now, significant Indian investments are in the country, and Delhi’s Bangladesh policy is determined by Indian industrialists.

The problem is that Bangladeshi Muslims, particularly businessmen, are pro-India because they want to expand their businesses in India. However, the majority of religious Muslims in Bangladesh are intensely anti-India. Therefore, any democratic government in Bangladesh would be intensely anti-India. But Indian and Bangladeshi businessmen will not allow an anti-India government because it would harm their businesses. Additionally, Delhi cannot allow another Pakistan on its doorstep.

So, how can Bangladesh taste democracy? The majority of the country is anti-India. On the other hand, the capital of both countries and Delhi will not let that happen. What is the solution?

(3) The Future of Democracy in Bangladesh

Bangladesh cannot achieve democracy as long as it remains anti-India. Therefore, the ongoing civil conflict will continue, stop, and then resume until everyone in Bangladesh’s politics understands that opposing India is not an option due to geographic realities. This realization will come if India continues to grow stronger militarily and economically. Consequently, the people of Bangladesh will have to accept that there is no future without good relations with India.

An exception might occur if India disintegrates like the Soviet Union. But is that possible? Why did the Soviet Union break apart? It was mainly because it could no longer feed its people, coupled with weak production and a police state.

In India, food prices are rising rapidly due to global warming and the failure to pass agricultural reform bills. In June 2023, food prices increased by 9%, and this June, food prices have risen by 11%. Despite a $24 billion subsidy, costs keep climbing because of increasing agricultural production expenses and a lack of modern technology in Indian agriculture. No military can sustain a country facing a food crisis. Pakistan is on the brink of collapse for similar reasons.

If modern agricultural technology is not introduced, the food crisis in India will worsen. The Reserve Bank of India has stated that food prices are rising at a rate of 7-9%. If this crisis continues, it will be challenging to keep India united. Issues like language policy, ethnic conflicts, and regional politics won’t break India apart; a food crisis will.

Therefore, India also faces significant challenges. If India overcomes these and emerges as a stronger state, Bangladesh will have two options: either all Bangladeshi political parties will become pro-India, allowing the Bangladeshi people to enjoy democracy, or a strong anti-India movement will arise in Bangladesh, which seems to be the direction in which the country is heading. In this scenario, the anti-India movement will quickly turn into an anti-Hindu movement, spreading hatred against Hindus, leading to the destruction of homes, murders, and rapes. In such a case, India will intervene militarily to restore order, similar to the 2006-2008 caretaker model, where a prominent economist, scientist, or professor would become president with military backing, gaining public trust by tackling corruption and helping businesses. A government trusted by the capitals of both India and Bangladesh will be installed.

If a China- or Pakistan-aligned government comes to power, it will be removed through military rebellion, which might even lead to civil war.

West Bengal should prepare for Hindu refugees from Bangladesh. This is the harsh reality now.