During its 15 and a half years in power, the Awami League government has been accused of various crimes, including corruption, enforced disappearances, political repression, and suppression of opposition leaders and activists. However, on August 5 last year, a student-led public uprising resulted in the downfall of the Hasina government.
While in power, Sheikh Hasina’s administration faced strong criticism from BNP leaders. Even after the interim government led by Dr. Yunus took charge, BNP continued its opposition to the Awami League. However, following a statement by the Indian Army Chief—suggesting that Bangladesh-India relations would normalize if an elected government took office—BNP has softened its stance toward Awami League. Now, BNP appears willing to allow the Awami League to re-enter politics and participate in elections.
But why this shift? Is BNP making another strategic mistake? Does BNP believe India will support them in returning to power? BNP has made several political miscalculations in the past. The Indian Army Chief’s statement should not be seen as a cause for excitement—it could simply be a political maneuver by Sheikh Hasina and India. Therefore, BNP must remain cautious. The party, founded by President Ziaur Rahman, remains one of the most popular in Bangladesh. It should focus on its leadership, prepare for elections, and work toward gaining public support to assume power and serve the nation.
Meanwhile, the interim government and Bangladesh Jamaat-e-Islami have taken a different stance. They firmly oppose the Awami League’s return to politics. The interim government’s press secretary, Shafiqul Alam, recently stated that Awami League would not be allowed to organize any political activities until it faces legal accountability for its past misdeeds. According to him, if any Awami League leader with a clean image wishes to return to politics, they must first apologize for the party’s actions.
Similarly, Jamaat-e-Islami has echoed this position, declaring that Awami League should not be permitted to engage in politics until its past actions are addressed. However, this raises an important question: Jamaat, as an Islamic political party, has long advocated for justice, but does this stance reflect a policy of political revenge? Additionally, who is Jamaat to decide whether Awami League can return to politics?
These questions remain at the forefront of national political discourse.
Masudur Rahman
Writer and Journalist