What did the comparison with Sri Lanka imply?

The quota reform movement, and the subsequent mass movement, indicates just how far Bangladesh has changed. The discrimination created by the political misuse of the quota system sparked off a sense of justice and injustice among the students. It heightened their awareness of rights and boosted their courage.

With the degeneration of democracy and the rise of authoritarian propensities over the past decade and a half, these perceptions had almost been lost. The huge participation and support for the students' movement against the hereditary claim to state facilities, has had a significant impact on the political environment.

What has not changed an iota is the government's blaming the opposition for anything to do with the movement and their strategy to once again harass them by throwing them into jail and filing cases against them. They are following this strategy now too.

The media reports how the demonstrating students and anti-government politicians are being nabbed in the arrest drive being carried out in the name of "block raids".

However, there are all indications that this over-used strategy is proving to be ineffective. This is being reported not just in the local media, but in the foreign press as well.

On 30 July, the heading of a first page report of the New York Times read, "A test of her sweeping power". It was written, "The crackdown also follows a well-established tactic under Ms. Hasina’s 15-year rule: using every opportunity to crush her political opponents by rounding up their leaders and dismantling their mobilization."

Within the country too, those involved in the movement say that the government is taking steps in banning Bangladesh Jamaat-e-Islami simply to divert attention away from the killing of the students, shirk their liability and accountability in this regard.

A student amid a demonstration spoke out in no uncertain terms. She said, "They have been talking about banning Jamaat from way back when the war crimes trial was going on, but nothing was done. They are doing this now out of political motive."

When the government imposed curfew to control the violence, the minister for the first few days were saying that a third party has entered the movement. Now they are saying that have intelligence information that BNP and Jamaat were involved in the violence.

We heard the same narrative during arrests in the past. Yet over the past 15 years there has hardly been any proof at all of the opposition leaders and activists being involved in the acts of sabotage.

Before the last general election, many cases were filed against potential candidates. They were hurriedly convicted to disqualify them from contesting in the polls. Legal experts say that in most cases filed by the police, the verdict was passed simply based on the depositions of the investigating officers, indicating that the verdicts were ostensibly passed as requested.

The strategies taken up to suppress the movement were unprecedented. If the police and BGB, and later the armed forces, were used to send the demonstrators back home, then why were Bangladesh Chhatra League (BCL) and party leaders and activists initially deployed for the purpose?

In the past, BNP's programmes were met with counter programmes and there is all reason to believe this habit has been passed on to control the students' movement, exacerbating the situation further.

No killing is acceptable and we all want proper investigation and justice. But the backdrop of the politics of simply placing the blame on the opposition, needs due analysis. The picture presented by the daily Samakal of four hotspots in Dhaka city clearly shows how leaders and activists of the ruling party, in front of the police, swooped down in attack on the demonstrations. That incited the resistance to spread. (So many deaths, so much destruction, 25 July).

When the demonstrations were attacked under the leadership of the local member of parliament in Jatrabari, the protests broke out in all fury and lashed out against the police. There was even an incident where a policeman was killed and strung up from the flyover.

Under the same headline, events of Uttara were reported. In their tirade to control the demonstrations, gunfire was opened against the protestors before the former mayor of Gazipur and two councillors could be assaulted. A video went viral on social media of a central leader of Jubo League and member of parliament instigating party men to attack demonstration at Mirpur-10. The chasing of Chhatra League leaders and activists out from the various educational institutions is also an outburst of the suppressed rage of the general students.

CPB leader Mujahidul Islam Selim who has observed the movement up close, spoke from his experience as a leader during the 60' student movement, "The allegation that a third party had entered the movement is laughable. People from all walks of life enter any mass movement." (The state is ineffective from all angles, Samakal, 28 July).

The intellectuals outside of any political sphere also echo that observation. Professor of Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology (BUET)'s electrical and electronic engineering department and former president of the BUET teachers association Abdul Hasib Chowdhury, speaking to Prothom Alo, said, "The demonstrators did not have a violent attitude. It was when they faced obstruction and assault that they put up resistance." (This is no longer just a student movement, 18 July, Prothom Alo).

When Awami League was in the opposition, there was not a single movement in the country, whether of students, professionals or any section of society that it did not actively support. It is not that these movements were free of violence and those in the government at the time also termed the demonstrators as conspirators and accused them of sabotage. There have been clashes with the police in past movements too, but never has it been so extremely repressive.

The indiscriminate use of lethal weapons and arbitrary firing this time can be explained by a comment of Awami League general secretary Obaidul Quader, "There was even a plan to instigate a Sri Lankan-style mass uprising and take over the prime minister's house." His words have admission of a possible mass uprising. But do these words also not have admission of killing for the sake to clinging on to power?

Everyone now acknowledges that political crisis lies behind the student and mass movements. Even the 14  Party allies Rashed Khan Menon and Hasanul Huq Inu as well as Mujibul Huq Chunnu of Jatiya Party, the party in seat-sharing understanding with the 14 Party, said that there must be a political resolution to the political problem and that calls for discussion (Advice to sit with all parties, Jugantar, 30 July).

At the centre of the political crisis lies the question of the government's election legitimacy. The solution does not lie in mere understanding among a handful or parties or alliances. In the past political leadership has several times found a solution to the crisis by relenting on the question of power. This time too, such a solution is imperative.

* Kamal Ahmed is a senior journalist

* This column appeared in the print and online edition of Prothom Alo and has been rewritten for the English edition by Ayesha Kabir