By Enayet Kabir
What does it signify when Home Secretary Nasimul Gani is gazetted for the post of Cabinet Secretary even before his “oath”? Under whose provocation was this pro-Pakistani officer—who is uncomfortable for India—placed in such a vital position?
Why is the NCP, which had been objecting for so long, being rushed to sign the “July Charter”? The outgoing interim (government) is loudly claiming that the ‘Yes’ vote won in the referendum. Where exactly did it win? The winning Members of Parliament will take their oaths as “Constituent Assembly Members.”
Yet, the Election Commission is struggling to reconcile the “discrepancies” in the votes received by the National Parliament across various centres.
Despite being repeatedly insulted and humiliated by Yunus’s interim government, India remained patient.
Narendra Modi was the “very first” to rush out congratulations following the BNP’s victory in Bangladesh‘s recent “election,” expressing relief.
There is discussion in political circles that India played a diplomatic role in arranging Tarique Rahman’s return, viewing the BNP as the “second best option.”
India was waiting for the end of the rule of the Razakar-military-NGO clique supported by the “servant of Pakistan,” war criminal-backed Jamaat-e-Islami.
It is natural for India to play a role in ensuring that “pro-Pakistan” Jamaat cannot sit directly in power to play an anti-India role in Bangladesh.
Whether the “political government” led by Tarique Rahman will be “India-friendly” remains to be proven.
The role of the “new government” in the construction of the Teesta Barrage and the military airbase in Lalmonirhat will provide the answer.
However, the assurance that Bangladeshi soil will not be used on behalf of a “third country” (Pakistan, Turkey, or China) is crucial to India.
The July masterminds—the 2024 regime-change actors and extra-constitutional usurpers—are handing over power only after ensuring a “safe exit.”
However, the main protagonists, the military and the military intelligence agency DGFI, must obtain indemnity from the new government.
Has Bangladesh been saved from “de-politicisation” for the time being? The answer will come after observing the behaviour of the judiciary over the next week and monitoring the law and order situation once military members begin returning to their barracks.
However, the “victory celebrations” of Bangladesh’s educated degree-holders following the “match-fixed election” of the War Criminal Jamaat-BNP-NCP “Tripartite Government Alliance” were unprecedented.
Since the results, they have attempted to build a narrative: that the victory of the BNP is a win for “pro-liberation forces” and “democratic forces”!
The main feature of this narrative is to establish in society that the war-criminal party, Jamaat-e-Islami, was defeated without the Awami League. But in reality, this election has granted “political legitimacy” to the war criminal Jamaat.
The masterminds of the July riots have secured a comfortable “safe exit”! One must not forget that every time the BNP formed a government since 1991, Jamaat-e-Islami was a partner.
The anti-Bangladesh war-criminal force, Jamaat, has finally gained recognition as a “mainstream democratic political” party.
The military-civilian mafia group helped the BNP win using the “binary” politics of the Liberation War.
Even after the BNP-led alliance forms the government, the Razakar-military-NGO clique will not become weak.
In July-August 2024, the fall of Sheikh Hasina’s Awami League government—planned by the US “Deep State”—was portrayed as a “student uprising” to hide a “military coup.”
The military-civilian mafia has long tried to establish a narrative that “politicians are creating an autocratic system; therefore, politicians must be tied hand and foot.”
The crisis regarding the activism of the Yunus-Ali Riaz-Debapriya-Motiur Rahman-Mahfuz Anam gang is fundamental.
They have led the public to believe that “politicians are corrupt, autocratic, and unfit to run the state,” while “civil society” is more capable.
The problem is, they believe politicians must be shackled to be held accountable, yet they refuse to admit that the “military” and its nurtured “civil society” are the primary causes of autocratic tendencies.
Corporate groups and the civil bureaucracy are also part of this narrative.
Why is the military-backed Yunus government making desperate attempts to establish a “referendum, state reform, and a constitutional Upper House”? Because they want to build the “state” through depoliticisation.
They view the military-civil bureaucracy and civil society as alternatives to politics. This line of thinking is fundamentally incorrect for nation-building.
Without democratic development within political parties, it is impossible to establish democracy in society, a crucial aspect missing in both the Awami League and the BNP. There is no actual need for a “new political settlement”; what is urgent is the growth of democracy.
In this game of chess, Muhammad Yunus has, for now, achieved a “checkmate.”
It has been proven that the US Deep State is stronger than the country’s President, because the Deep State was behind him, Yunus remained in power with US favour despite being disliked by Donald Trump.
Despite “pressure” from India, he did not allow an inclusive election including the Awami League. Instead, the election went according to plan, ensuring “whoever needed to win which seat” was handled via a blueprint.
The US Deep State’s “picnic” was well-organised, but the “cooking” was poor. How was Yunus’s plan implemented? The Deep State’s plan was to put Jamaat in power, and they worked openly toward that.
ALSO READ: Rs 45-crore meth seized in Tripura; Assam Rifles, DRI nab drug trafficker
Much like the saying “Even God makes mistakes,” the US policymakers erred.
They did not consider the BNP “mainstream,” calculating based on the BNP’s average results from the last three elections, the death of the party leader [Begum Zia], and her son’s long absence from field politics.
Furthermore, considering Yunus’s direct involvement, the Army Chief’s unconditional support, the fact that nearly 80 percent of recruitment in the administration and all departments were Jamaat followers, and the massive investments from the US, Pakistan, and especially Turkey, they considered Jamaat to be the number one party.
Ultimately, they had to retreat and make a deal with the Tarique Rahman-led BNP. Nevertheless, they still hope that, according to the July Charter, there will be an “Upper House.”
A national government will be formed with the BNP, Jamaat, and NCP. Dr Yunus will become President, and the advisors will become permanent members of the Upper House in various positions.
We have to wait longer to see if the election results have overturned all calculations. But one thing is certain: the account of how much Muhammad Yunus and the advisors earned from Bangladesh will never be found.
Enayet Kabir is a political and economic analyst
