Bangladesh’s Political Crisis: The Military’s Potential Role Amidst Protests

Bangladesh’s Turbulent Political Landscape and Military’s Role

With Bangladesh’s security forces seemingly on a perilous collision course with enraged protesters following a brutal crackdown on Sunday, attention is shifting towards the nation’s formidable military establishment. Observers are eager to see how the military might respond to the escalating tensions on the streets. Protesters are vehemently calling for the resignation of Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, who has been in power for 15 years, during which her governance has increasingly leaned towards authoritarianism.

As violence escalates and threatens to plunge the country into instability and chaos, the military, which has previously attempted to distance itself from the violent actions of the police amid weeks of unrest, could play a pivotal role in the unfolding crisis. Historically, the Bangladeshi army has been known to orchestrate coups and counter-coups. However, in recent decades, it has opted for a more subdued role in public affairs, often exerting influence from behind the scenes.

This shift in military posture is, in part, attributed to Sheikh Hasina herself. Her father, Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, who was the first leader of Bangladesh, along with many family members, was assassinated in a military coup in 1975. During her tenure, Hasina has strategically filled military leadership positions with loyalists and has facilitated their access to lucrative government contracts and various business ventures.

Moreover, there are significant international incentives for the military to maintain its current stance. The Bangladeshi military has been a key contributor to United Nations peacekeeping missions, which have provided it with an important source of revenue. Should the military become involved in a coup, it would likely face severe criticism or even ostracism from the international community, particularly from the U.N., whose human rights chief recently called for restraint and accountability from those who hold “command responsibility” in light of the recent violence.

While the army was deployed to the streets during the crackdown on protesters late last month, reports have emerged indicating discomfort among military ranks regarding this involvement. In a notable development, dozens of former senior officers issued a statement urging the military not to intervene in favor of those responsible for the current turmoil—a statement interpreted by many as a veiled reference to the police forces and possibly even to Sheikh Hasina herself.

On Sunday, General Waker-uz-Zaman, the army’s chief, convened a meeting with senior officers aimed at addressing these concerns. The subsequent statement from the army emphasized that “the Bangladesh Army will always stand by the people in the interest of the public and in any need of the state.”

Should Sheikh Hasina’s grip on power become unmanageable, analysts suggest that the military is unlikely to initiate a direct takeover. Instead, it may choose to facilitate a transitional period from the sidelines, potentially supporting the establishment of a caretaker government, reminiscent of the political landscape in 2007.

Retired General M. N. Khan remarked, “There are significant international repercussions to a military coup. Moreover, it is the younger officers who are more apprehensive about pursuing any such actions.” This caution reflects a broader understanding of the potential consequences of military intervention in Bangladesh’s already volatile political climate.