Revolutionary upsurge of the masses

The popular uprising in Bangladesh on July-August last year resulted in the downfall of the autocratic and fascist regime of Sheikh Hasina on August 5, 2024. On the day, her 15-year long vicious and repressive rule came to a sudden end when she was forced to resign and flee the country by air with the help of her Indian masters. Although some people prefer to call it a revolution of the students and masses, most political scientists and analysts generally term the event as a 'mass upsurge' or 'mass uprising' against an autocratic fascist regime that virtually destroyed all democratic institutions of the country during its one and a half decades' rule.  

Two months before that epoch-making event, unremitting anger and frustration were generated among the students, youths, and job-seekers across the country when a politicised bench of the High Court Division declared the abolition of quota system for class-1 and class-2 government jobs as illegal on June 5 last year. The abolition of quotas was previously announced by the Hasina regime in order to hang on to power in the face of a popular movement by students in 2018 for reforming the discriminatory system that unjustly favoured the ruling coterie. 

This time, the protests gradually intensified, and the students announced a non-stop programme for realising their four-point demand on reforming the quota system on July 1, 2024. In the beginning, the protest programmes were confined to processions, halting of transport movements, blockades, and submission of memorandums to relevant authorities. But the impervious and arrogant ministers of the ruling Awami League (AL) including the prime minister took a hard and intransigent stance on the issue. Their arrogant, irresponsible, and intimidating comments directed against the agitating students further alienated and infuriated the general masses. The protesters subsequently resorted to all-out agitation on the university campuses, expulsion of the Bangladesh Chhatra League (BCL) cadres, and countrywide blockades. Clashes were then taking place on a regular basis between the general students and the police force, who were aided by pro-Awami League goons all over the country. The movement of the students and job-seeking youths continued like this till mid-July.

However, things suddenly heated up when Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina termed the agitating students as offspring of Razakars (collaborators of Pakistan army during liberation war) at a press conference held in Dhaka on July 14. Then while supporting her, the AL general secretary Obaidul Quader boasted to journalists that the Chhatra League (student wing of Awami League) activists were sufficient for suppressing the movement. As a follow-up to these utterances, the BCL cadres viciously attacked the peaceful processions of agitators inside Dhaka University campus on July 15, which received wide coverage in the media and generated further anger and fury among the students. The situation deteriorated even further when the prominent student activist of Rangpur Begum Rokeya University Abu Sayed was fatally shot dead by police on July 16 while leading a procession near the campus. The video of his brave posture - stretching back his open arms while confronting the police before being shot dead - became viral across the country. This valiant martyr became an icon of courage for the agitators overnight, and the spirit of his bravery was transmitted to all those involved in the movement. 

Subsequently, the Hasina regime became enraged when the BCL cadres were expelled from the residential halls of Dhaka University on July 17 by the agitating students, and many workers of BCL also voluntarily resigned from their posts. The regime realised that this movement could not be suppressed with the help of Chhatra League goons alone. It therefore sent huge contingents of police and other security forces into the Dhaka University campus and forcibly emptied the residential halls. However, this repressive measure of the government was only a temporary setback for the movement. In reality, the movement became even stronger due to its impact. This was the time when the students of private universities, colleges, and madrasas in Dhaka and elsewhere in the country joined the movement in a concerted manner for keeping it alive. Side by side, the general masses residing in various localities of Dhaka including Uttara, Rampura, Mohakhali, Banani, Dhanmondi, Mirpur and Jatrabari spontaneously came down to the streets in support of the protesters. Even the family-members and teachers of students came forward by expressing support. 

The agitating students put forward their 9-point demand on July 19 following innumerable deaths and injuries caused by the Hasina regime during countrywide protests on July 18. At least 31 protesters were killed on the day and over 100 injured. Their demands included an apology from Sheikh Hasina and resignation of some key ministers including the home minister Asaduzzaman Khan Kamal. In this way, the movement graduated into a greater national movement from that of a movement for reforming the quota system in government jobs. The regime responded by enforcing internet blackout from July 18, followed by the deployment of army across the country and imposition of curfew with 'shoot at sight' orders on July 19, when at least 56 protesters were shot dead by the security forces including 44 in capital Dhaka. This was followed by the killing of at least 26 more protesters including 15 in Dhaka on July 20, and the announcement of holidays on July 21 and 22 by the regime.

Meanwhile, the police resorted to mass arrests and block-raids by targeting students at various localities, and even helicopters were flown by RAB for shooting down protesters. The government-orchestrated verdict of the Appellate Division of Supreme Court on the quota system delivered on July 21 did not have any impact whatsoever on the ongoing movement because of the blood already spilled across the country. A popular slogan was then heard at many places: "Take back your quota, give me back my brother". A 'Complete Shutdown' was then observed across the country by the protesters on July 22. 

The support of the general masses towards the movement increased manifold during the 16-31 July period. The movement then took a turn towards seeking justice for the victims of repression. As a consequence, it did not remain confined to the students alone, and the participation of the masses including parents and guardians of students became a common feature. Finally, this desire for justice got transformed into the one-point demand for the resignation and ouster of autocrat Hasina.  

The people of the country were already very angry and aggrieved due to the continuous misrule, corruption, fraudulent elections, and socio-economic crises perpetrated by the Hasina regime. The lives and livelihoods of the general masses were severely hampered due to the anti-people policies pursued by the regime. In this backdrop, when the students stood up against the autocrat by ignoring all kinds of threats, repression, and intimidation, the grassroots people joined them on the streets spontaneously by identifying with their cause. Therefore, the widespread participation of the masses in this anti-autocracy movement did not originate from a mere spark of the moment; rather it was an explosion of people's cumulative anger and grievances piled up over one and a half decades against unabated discriminations, injustices, deceptions, fraudulences, tortures, and repression let loose by the regime. 

The people were fed up with the steep rise in the prices of essentials, rampant corruption in all sectors, gradual rise in socio-economic disparities, and plundering of state-wealth by the ruling coterie - giving rise to complete loss of confidence in the regime. But the false and misleading rhetorics of the regime did no subside a bit over the years, as the ministers and other AL-stalwarts continued to mock and belittle people including the students and media-men whenever they opposed the regime. People were infuriated as the onus of governance was shunned by the rulers, who often blamed others for the problems created by themselves. By killing a defenceless Abu Sayed without any provocation whatsoever, the regime conclusively proved that it did not care a bit about the security, lives, and wellbeing of the people. This anti-people stance generated a new wave of mass discontent, and ignited the final spark that made people belonging to all strata of society revolt against the regime. 

Therefore, the anti-discrimination reform movement led by the students and youths resulted in the collective withdrawal of support for the then government. Although this was not evident at the start, the resignations by a large number of disillusioned Chhatra League leaders and activists clearly pointed to that. They were joined by teachers, physicians, lawyers, peasants, and workers, who started to express solidarity with the movement. At a later stage, dissent and division among the armed forces personnel drove a wedge between the military and the Hasina-regime. The officers and soldiers, especially in the lower echelons, expressed their displeasure at the situation and conveyed their unwillingness to shoot at unarmed civilians whom they were supposed to protect. 

As the moment of truth arrived for Hasina, some retired officers of the armed forces including former army-chiefs at a press conference held on 4 August at the RAOWA Club of Dhaka urged the military not to attack the common people. This received wide coverage and support among the military and the masses.  The retired military officers and their families also brought out defiant processions in support of the movement from some locations including Mirpur DOHS, which was quite unprecedented. Earlier, ignoring all kinds of intimidations, the coordinators of the movement put forward a one-point demand for Hasina's resignation following a huge rally at Central Shaheed Minar in Dhaka on August 3. The military top-brasses then decided not to oppose the movement after internal consultations and discussions. However, the AL was adamant till the end about suppressing the movement by force. Therefore, armed cadres of the Awami League as well as the partisan police personnel attacked the agitators all over the country on August 4 resulting in a huge number of casualties. Even in the face of all these odds, the students and the masses remained resolute and continued to resist the violent assaults. 

As the situation reached a boiling point, the coordinators of the movement announced the 'March to Dhaka' programme on August 4, which was initially slated for August 6, but later brought forward by one day due to huge public support across the country. The students then coordinated the entry of people into Dhaka city from various corners of Bangladesh.  Lakhs of people started streaming into Dhaka from the morning of August 5; they were headed towards the official residence of the prime minister 'Ganobhaban'. In the face of this huge show of force by the masses, the chiefs of the armed forces told Sheikh Hasina that it was impossible to control the masses by applying force. The final moments of Hasina's reign therefore arrived. It should, however, be pointed out that just as there was huge participation of people in this uprising, the pro-people stance of the armed forces was also critical in deposing Hasina and averting further bloodshed and loss of innocent lives.   

Many people previously believed that the armed forces would side with Sheikh Hasina till the last due to the coterie-based government-military alliance built over a long period. However, some also believed that it would have become difficult for the military to continue working with the UN peacekeeping missions if it sided with Hasina by taking a stand against the people; and therefore, this factor may also have played a part in their decision-making. But a majority of observers believed there was an apprehension among the military leadership regarding a break-down in their internal chain of command if the troops were ordered to continue shooting at unarmed civilians. The widespread dissatisfaction within the armed forces on this issue could have caused serious fissure inside, which would have put the military leadership at a disadvantage. Besides, the dominant role and hegemonic interferences by India in the internal affairs of Bangladesh during the AL-rule might also have alienated a sizable segment of the patriotic military personnel against the Hasina regime. 

This revolutionary episode in Bangladesh's history enacted during July-August 2024 can rightfully be termed as a mass-upsurge or uprising. Although revolt, uprising, and revolution may have similar connotations, there are some differences as well. For example, revolt entails sudden outburst of cumulative and collective anger against the authorities, but it usually does not bring about ouster of any government, although some reforms may materialise. On the other hand, mass upsurge takes place when the common people unitedly bring about the downfall of an autocratic regime by effecting changes in power-structure through collective expression of solidarity. On the other hand, revolution entails bringing about structural changes in a state through violent uprising in order to radically transform a degenerated socio-economic cum political system. Therefore, many analysts hold the view that the movement for reforming the discriminatory quota system in government jobs was a revolt that ultimately took the shape of a mass-upsurge. 

Democracy has been repeatedly jeopardised in Bangladesh in the past due to the presence of fascistic ingredients in the state-structure. In this context, the eminent historian and veteran political commentator Badruddin Umar said in an interview: "The common people may nurture the impression that they have become free and independent, and such a situation will not reappear after the demise of Hasina's fascism. But this is not correct. The people may, however, continue to enjoy freedom in some areas. Those who would come to power after so many incidents would not immediately resort to such repression. But later on, it cannot be said with certainty that repression, torture, imprisonment, and black laws would not be applied, taking into account conditions prevailing in the country. The 70 to 80 percent members in parliament belonging to the business community would not go away. They could not be disposed of through this movement. They would remain, and would try to run the statecraft in future in accordance with their interests. Therefore, it is not true that the country has become completely liberated. There is no reason to believe that the relief the common people felt after ousting a criminal and fascist individual like Sheikh Hasina would last forever."  

There are many ingredients for a return to fascism in our constitution, state, and political culture that may aid in its re-emergence. For example, an individual can become prime minister for as many times as he or she likes. If the same person becomes prime minister over and over again, then the tendency to become an autocrat increases. Again, there is no balance between the powers of the prime minister and the president. The prime minister holds absolute power, while the president only plays a nominal role, although the presidential system proved to be quite effective in Bangladesh during the rule of President Ziaur Rahman. Presently, the prime minister can simultaneously be the party-chief, the head of government, and the leader of the house - as was seen during Hasina's rule. A most undemocratic stipulation like Article-70 also exists in the constitution, which facilitates authoritarianism. 

In this context, Badruddin Umar further says: "None of the governments since independence took any initiative for structural transformation of the state. Rather, the situation has seriously deteriorated over the past 15 years. Various vested quarters including businessmen have occupied prominent positions in the state and society. Time is needed for cleansing these elements. The objectives of the mass upsurge and the establishment of a discrimination-free society would materialise only if required reforms are implemented. For this to happen, just as changes in law would be required, similarly, the mentality of the people will also have to undergo transformation. Above all, the prevailing undemocratic political culture will have to be rectified."   

Therefore, reform of the state-structure is urgently needed for thwarting the reappearance of fascism and obtaining full benefits of a mass-upsurge that emanated from a revolt by the students. A complete democratic transformation is needed for putting the ownership of the state into the hands of the common people. Everything would automatically take a turn for the better if the people are kept at the centre of all state initiatives by doing away with the current domination of vested interests like the business oligarchs, civil and military bureaucracy. 

Dr Helal Uddin Ahmed is a retired additional secretary, ex-editorial consultant of The Financial Express, and former editor of Bangladesh Quarterly. 

hahmed1960@gmail.com