First phase of July Uprising was ‘meticulously designed’, says Advisor Mahfuj

Information Advisor Mahfuj Alam has described the initial phase of the July Uprising as a “meticulous design”, crediting it for preparing the ground that ultimately led to the fall of the Awami League government.

He has also firmly denied that the Uprising had any connection to “mob violence” across the country.

In a pair of Facebook posts over the past 24 hours, Mahfuj has re-entered the political conversation after remaining largely silent since facing backlash two months ago for urging Jamaat-e-Islami to apologise for its alleged role in the 1971 Liberation War.

His new posts, one on the design of the uprising and another on “mob violence”, have each drawn several hundreds shares, though the comment sections remain locked.

Mahfuj has drawn a sharp line between the planned political groundwork and the mass uprising that followed.

He explained the July Uprising unfolded in two phases: between Jun 5 and Jul 18, a foundation was built for leadership and mobilisation; from Jul 19 to Aug 5, students and citizens across the country took charge of the movement.

The first phase, he said, was “strategically” crafted, while the second phase was shaped by the sacrifice and participation of revolutionary students.

‘WHAT’S THE ISSUE WITH METICULOUS DESIGN?’

In a speech delivered in the United States last year, Chief Advisor Muhammad Yunus described the July quota reform protests as “meticulously designed” -- a remark that has since been repeatedly used by fugitive leaders of the now-banned Awami League as evidence of conspiracy behind the Uprising that led to the end of the party’s 15-year rule.

In his post, Mahfuj defended the idea of strategic planning, arguing that many of Bangladesh’s most defining struggles were “not spontaneous but carefully designed”.

He pointed to the Agartala Conspiracy, the 1969 mass uprising, and the March 1971 non-cooperation movement as precedents.

“What’s wrong if the 2024 Uprising was also meticulously designed?” he asked. “No revolution in the world has ever succeeded without a plan. People need strategic guidance and political clarity until the conditions are ripe.

“Once that’s achieved, they move on their own -- but that doesn’t mean the design was unnecessary.”

The advisor argued that a well-planned people’s movement should be “a source of pride”.

“If Serajul Alam Khan, Tajuddin Ahmad, Siraj Sikder, Bhashani -- even Sheikh Mujib himself -- didn’t feel guilty for being part of strategic efforts to defeat Pakistan, and we honour them despite their flaws, why shouldn’t this generation be proud of removing Hasina through a well-planned uprising?”

Mahfuj also rejected claims of foreign involvement.

Apart from a statement by the UN before the one-point declaration on Aug 3, 2024, he said there was “not a shred” of influence or coordination from foreign powers or the military.

He added, “If Sheikh Mujib and others deserve respect for coordinating with India in Agartala to launch the war of independence -- and they do -- then why are the Uprising’s leaders and participants being criticised when no such foreign or third-party involvement existed?”

“Look at the series of events from Maulana Bhasani’s 1968 gherao movement to the 1969 uprising, or March 1971--you will find examples of both meticulous design and spontaneous rebellion,” Mahfuj wrote.

Attempts to contact Mahfuj were unsuccessful.

‘REVOLUTIONARY STUDENTS AREN’T A MOB’

Turning to the wave of violence that followed the Uprising, Mahfuj drew a sharp contrast.

“A mob,” he wrote, “is an opportunistic group driven by vengeance, with no political vision or purpose.”

By contrast, he said the July student protesters had a defined mission, deep respect for democracy and human rights, and a historic role in shaping the country’s future.

He described mob violence as “a form of social fascism”, which, he argued, was a direct product of 16 years of “political fascism” under Sheikh Hasina.

“Unless we understand this connection,” he said, “we won’t be able to confront ‘mob mentality’ and ‘social fascism’.”

Labelling groups as “Islamofascists” would not solve the issue either, he warned.

Instead, he pointed to July’s ability to open space for dialogue across ideological lines and urged that this momentum be used to tackle the real roots of social fascism: the collapse of democracy and the rule of law under Hasina.

He complained that even though July's student protesters were not part of any violence, they have been unfairly blamed for later incidents of “mob violence”.

“If a mob had emerged after July, we wouldn’t have seen so much civility or this flood of apologetic narratives,” Mahfuj wrote.

Citing past examples of mob violence, Mahfuj listed the attacks on the Bihari community, on anti-Mujib young freedom fighters, and on religious minorities -- often with alleged backing from major political parties.

“If you stretch the definition of a ‘mob’,” he wrote, “you’d have to include the ‘people’s court’, the ‘people’s stage’ of ’96, Oct 28, and even Shahbagh -- all examples of ‘mob justice’ and ‘mob violence’.”

As an advisor, he said the state’s duty was to uphold the rule of law. That was why he had spoken out several times about the dangers of mob action -- from attacks on shrines to incidents at book fairs.

He criticised political leaders who are now trying to paint the July Uprising as “a mob movement”.

“It’s alarming that Mujibist leftists and the Awami League’s cultural thugs are now portraying the July revolution as mob violence and linking it to the law and order situation that followed.”

“If this was really mob rule,” he added, “the student revolutionaries wouldn’t have kept the country safe for one and a half months without police or Ansar.”

He brushed off the account of saving Obaidul Quader during the uprising as a “scripted fabrication”.

“The scriptwriters assumed it would be believable because the revolutionary students were not vengeful.”

He urged supporters to remain lawful but also prepare for political resistance.

“If laws are violated, or if communal or political violence occurs, take legal action. The student masses of the July uprising must act responsibly in upholding the rule of law.

“But in facing Mujibism and imperialism, you must also build resistance with your utmost effort,” he added.