Will democracy be restored after ouster of Bangladesh leader?
Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina was once a sign of democratic hope and prosperity for Bangladesh, but with time and power, she turned autocratic. Her efforts to entrench her rule, however, finally failed. On Monday, she resigned, driven from power by popular protests that even a violent crackdown could not quell.
People power prevailed. What began weeks ago as peaceful, student-led protests against an unfair job quota system grew into a broad anti-government movement seeking Hasina’s ouster in response to her regime’s increasingly repressive behavior. Whether her departure will pave the way for a more or less democratic and prosperous future remains to be seen.
Her regime’s ruthlessness was in full force as police and armed party loyalists responded aggressively to the protests, leading to a death toll of more than 300 people. It was clear, though, that the protesters would not yield. The military ultimately decided to stand with them and not facilitate the crackdown, which was likely the deciding factor in Hasina’s decision to flee.
It was a dramatic and unhappy end to a career that could have been remembered for very different reasons. Hasina had been a fixture in Bangladesh’s history and politics since the country’s birth. She is the daughter of Bangladesh’s founding president, Sheikh Mujib Rahman. He was assassinated in a military coup nearly 50 years ago after leading the country to independence from Pakistan in 1971 in the wake of a genocide. Hasina lived in exile after his death but returned in 1981 to lead her father’s political party, the Awami League. She became a democratic icon when she joined other political parties to protest military rule. First elected prime minister in 1996, she lost in 2001, then returned to power in 2009 for another 15 years.
Hasina’s government was responsible for major economic gains that helped lift more than 25 million people out of poverty. Bangladesh had been one of the world’s poorest countries at its birth but had reached lower-middle-income status by 2015. Investments in the garment industry helped spur rapid development in education, health and women’s participation in the workforce. Average income levels even surpassed India at one point. But her popularity faded as she began to cling to power by crushing dissent and as growing corruption undermined the country’s economic development.
Journalists, political opponents and anyone else who questioned her power came under attack. She managed to secure her fourth five-year term in January in a controversial election because the opposition boycotted the polls.
Hasina’s achievements early in her career will now be forgotten, since what leaders do last is what the world remembers most. History will now remember her as an autocrat overthrown by popular demand, her home unceremoniously ransacked as she fled.
But what follows the fall of an autocrat isn’t always better. Just ask the people of Sudan or Libya about that.
Hasina’s ouster could put Bangladesh back on a path toward greater democracy and prosperity, or it could usher in a period of violence and instability. For Bangladesh, what happens next will turn on the decisions of those who still wield some power amid the vacuum Hasina’s departure created: the country’s military and its largely ceremonial president, Mohammed Shahabuddin.
Early signs suggest they are proceeding with a thoughtful and inclusive response. The army chief, Gen. Waker-uz-Zamam, announced the prime minister’s resignation on Monday and that discussions were underway with political parties and civil society about the formation of an interim government. He assured the protesters that the violent crackdown and deaths would be fully investigated. There were no indications, on the streets or otherwise, that the military intended to hold power for itself — at least not yet. Protesters made clear that they wouldn’t accept such an outcome, even temporarily.
The president and security chiefs met for hours with the leaders of the student protests to negotiate the interim government’s formation. They then named the country’s Nobel laureate Muhammad Yunus as the transitional leader, acceding to the students’ demands. Yunus is an economist and banker who pioneered the use of microlending to lift people out of poverty. He has been a longtime political opponent of Hasina as well. The president also ordered the release of another opposition leader, Khaleda Zia, who was convicted on corruption charges in 2018.
None of this guarantees a more peaceful future for the country of 175 million. Bangladesh’s military has a long history of meddling in politics and seizing power through coups. More political violence in retribution for years of oppression remains a big risk. Political Islamists could also use this transition to undermine the religious tolerance and secularism that were hallmarks of Hasina’s tenure. Creating a credible and inclusive interim government will be a delicate task, as will holding new elections. Uncertainty could undercut the country’s economic prospects even further.
But protests, at their core, are an act of hope that things can change for the better. If Bangladesh’s caretaker leaders really care about the country’s democratic future, its people may have better days ahead.
Elizabeth Shackelford is senior policy director at Dartmouth College’s Dickey Center for International Understanding and a foreign affairs columnist for the Chicago Tribune.
