-Student protests against public job quotas spiraled into a movement that forced Sheikh Hasina to resign after over 15 years in power
- Shift from demands for reforms to calls for Hasina’s removal was driven by a series of missteps by the government
DHAKA, Bangladesh
In mid-July, as protests raged in Bangladesh, Sheikh Hasina still projected an aura of invincibility, having ruled the country for over 15 years with four consecutive terms as prime minister.
All that was over in a matter of weeks, as what started as students protesting against a quota system in public jobs spiraled into a massive anti-government movement that forced Hasina to resign and leave the country in a military helicopter on Monday.
The shift from demands for reforms to a single-point agenda of Hasina’s removal was driven by a series of missteps by the government, starting from a high-profile bilateral visit to the use of inflammatory comments and deadly force.
Trip to China
On July 8, Hasina embarked on a four-day bilateral visit to China, following a trip to India just two weeks prior. These trips marked her first high-profile diplomatic engagements since her reelection in January.
India and China were crucial to Hasina’s diplomatic balancing act, with New Delhi a political ally and Beijing a major economic partner.
However, just before her China visit, two of her top deputies made controversial statements about China.
On July 3, Foreign Minister Hasan Mahmud remarked that India had “no objection” to Hasina’s upcoming trip to China.
The following day, Obaidul Quader, the secretary general of Hasina’s Awami League party, said India is Bangladesh’s “political friend, while China is merely a development partner.”
The comments sparked a flood of criticism, with Ruhul Kabir Rizvi, joint secretary general of the opposition Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP), suggesting that Hasina’s trip to China was essentially sanctioned by New Delhi, implying that she was under Indian influence.
Additionally, Quader’s characterization of China as just a “development partner” reportedly displeased Beijing.
While there was no such statement from China, the financial outcomes of Hasina’s trip fanned the rumor mill.
Prior to the visit, local media had anticipated financial agreements with Beijing worth around $20 billion, but Hasina returned with only about $100 million, and that too a day earlier than planned.
‘Razakar’ rhetoric and violence
Upon returning from China, Hasina conducted her usual press conference, a practice she followed after every bilateral trip.
Throughout her lengthy tenure, Hasina was known for her regular interaction with the media. Journalists at her press conferences often showed her a level of reverence and rarely asked questions that pushed her beyond her comfort zone.
However, at the July 14 press conference, Hasina appeared unusually fatigued and lacked her usual confidence.
When questioned about the ongoing student protests, Hasina made a significant misstep, indirectly calling the protesters “Razakar,” a highly offensive term in Bangladesh referring to those who supported the Pakistani military during the 1971 liberation war.
This labeling ignited widespread outrage, transforming a peaceful protest into a violent upheaval.
The protesting students organized a massive march to express their anger at Hasina’s comments, chanting a provocative slogan: “Who are you? I am Razakar … Says who? An autocrat.”
Rather than addressing the students' grievances seriously, several senior Awami League leaders escalated the situation by further vilifying the protesters.
They even went so far as to claim that the students, by identifying as Razakar, had “no right to live in Bangladesh.”
Quader, the Awami League secretary general, then announced that the party’s student wing, the Bangladesh Chhatra League (BCL), would give a “proper reply” to these so-called “traitors.”
On July 15, BCL activists targeted the protesters and even had police protection. By the next day, at least six deaths had been reported nationwide in violent clashes.
Lack of empathy
Following the bloodshed, Hasina addressed the nation, but her speech showed no empathy towards the deceased protesters and failed to acknowledge her role in escalating the initially peaceful movement.
As Shafiqul Alam, a senior Dhaka journalist, observed: “For the students, it became a fight for dignity rather than just about quota reform. They couldn’t accept that Hasina might avoid accountability for her derogatory comments.”
In the three days that followed, before the government imposed a curfew and deployed the military, over 200 people were killed, with nearly 80% of them students and ordinary citizens, according to Prothom Alo, the country’s largest daily.
Despite the high death toll, the Hasina administration focused on shifting public attention from the fatalities to the “economic damage” caused by the protesters in their attacks on state properties, including a metro rail and a state-owned television building.
Officials accused the main opposition parties, BNP and Jamaat-e-Islami, of “hijacking” the protests to further their political agenda, aiming to cause disruptions and topple the government.
Instead of visiting the grieving families, Hasina prioritized inspecting the damaged properties, which only fueled further anger among both students and the general public.
Social media was soon flooded with criticism of Hasina’s perceived lack of empathy, and a growing wave of discontent began to swell among the populace.
Call for resignation
On Aug. 3, tens of thousands of people gathered at the Shaheed Minar monument in the capital Dhaka, raising one sole demand: Hasina’s resignation.
The crowd was diverse, including individuals who had previously supported Hasina’s government, and they all voiced their frustration over Hasina’s refusal to apologize for the deaths of so many students.
Despite the mounting outrage, Awami League officials seemed to underestimate the scale of public’s anger.
On Aug. 4, State Minister for Information and Broadcasting Mohammad Ali Arafat was still accusing the opposition of misguiding the students, asserting that the government would deal firmly with the unrest.
By the end of the day, around 100 more people had been killed, prompting the students to announce a march to “seize the capital” on Aug. 5 – a day that spelled the end of Hasina’s 15 years in power.
