Hasina fled to save herself, leaving her father destroyed

The simple term to describe political changes that have taken place around the world is "revolution." There was a time when the communists would use the term "revolution" very frequently, whether relevant or not. Now they don't even utter the word. The political change of power that occurs from time to time is often violent. Change of power comprises two sides, the victors and the defeated. The victors call it revolution, the defeated call it conspiracy.

A one-party rule (BKSAL) descended upon the country in 1975. There was no provision kept in the constitution for change of government. The constitution stated that if there was to be any change, that would be in accordance to the wishes of the president. On 15 August power changed hands through a massacre. President Sheikh Mujibur Rahman was killed along with his family.

Sheikh Mujibur's government was toppled at a time when its popularity was in the dregs. There was a time when Sheikh Mujib was at the pinnacle of popularity. He had attained that position even before he went to power. There are few such instances in history, but the changes that took place in just a couple of years were unimaginable to many. And five decade on, the events were repeated on 5 August 2024. Surrounded by sycophants and opportunists, Sheikh Hasina thought things would continue this way forever. Even 24 hours before her downfall she perhaps could not perceive what public anger accumulated over the years could do.

The military coup of 1975 was unprecedented in our history. The military coups that took place before during the Pakistan rule had been bloodless. In 1975 it was a bloody military coup. Those who carried it out referred to it as a revolution. Later Awami League referred to it was a national and international conspiracy. My simple analysis is that the 1975 uprising was transpired by an angered and provoked section of the ruling party. A section of the army joined hands with them.

In 1971 Sheikh Mujib was the people's leader. In 1975 he was the ruler. In 1971 the Pakistan army wanted to suppress the people's movement and aspirations by whisking away Sheikh Mujib. That did not work. The 1975 move was an uprising against Sheikh Mujib's rule. While the people were not directly involved in the uprising, it had their support. Other than the ruling party, almost all other political parties supported the 1975 coup.

In 1990 we saw power changing hands again. A wave of enthusiasm and euphoria swept over the people -- we had overcome the state of military rule, in uniform or out, and had entered the realm of democracy. But it didn't take long for that bubble to burst. We have seen a continuity of autocratic rule in the garb of democratic government.

The one-party rule which we had seen from the seventies did not change even after the so-called switch over to democracy. We saw the rule of an individual. It was Khaleda, then Hasina, then Khaleda and their families that held the country hostage. Then 1/11 came along and shook things up a bit. But the politicians learnt nothing from 1/11.

Post 1/11, it was the Sheikh Hasina government that ruled the country at a stretch from 2009 to 2024. Three farcical or one-sided elections were held in this span of time. Sheikh Hasina would decide how many seats her party would get and how many the opposition would be given. We haven't seen or heard of such a situation anywhere. The government was run by one person, her family, her kith and kin, sycophants and goons. The people were simmering in anger, but found no way to give voice to their ire.

The political parties of the conventional ilk in country could hardly do anything. They held rallies and processions, they were attacked and injured, then beat a retreat. When the student movement took off in the name of quota reforms, it was not perceived that this movement would take on such massive proportions. The strategy adopted by the government to suppress this movement was the strategy of absolutely irrational rulers. Sheikh Hasina's stay in power, to a great extent, depended on the police force. But that protection broke down. The students simply marched on, ready to take bullets in their chests. Sheikh Hasina then called in the army. The army decided not to stand against the people. And Hasina's house of cards came tumbling down.

The anger of the people, the manner in which this ire was manifest, went even beyond Sheikh Hasina, Awami League and her sycophants, and fell upon Sheikh Mujibur Rahman.

Sheikh Mujib had gradually prepared the people of this country for independence. His house on Dhanmondi Road 32, which had been made into a museum, was vandalised.

For 15 years we had seen that every year on the morning of 15 August, Dhanmondi Road 32 was blocked on either side because the prime minister would be coming to lay wreaths at Bangabandhu's mural. Once she finished paying her respects, the road would be opened. All government officials were obliged to go there with banners. The party leaders and activists would hire people from all over to come there in exchange of money. The people were not participants in this display of mourning. On 15 August this year we saw similar people with sticks, bamboos and poles, taking over the road and beating up people.

The deceased Sheikh Mujib has had to pay the price of the anger, the ire and the frustration against Sheikh Hasina and her various strategies to cling on to power. Hasina has fled and saved herself, destroying her father Sheikh Mujib.

The language of protest in this country is manifest in damaging vehicles, setting fire to the homes of the opponents, beating up the opponents. But the question will arise today or tomorrow whether the burning of the house on Road 32 can be categorised as the same.

In 1971 people thronged the house on Road 32, arriving there in streams. In 1975 the bloody coup took place there, and later the house was set on fire. Many might gain a sort of sadist pleasure in siding with the attack, with slogans against fascism. They are unwilling to risk mob popularity by stating that this event may cast a slur, however minor, on the recent mass uprising.

Then again, the question may also arise as to how justified it is to express any mourning for Sheikh Hasina's autocrat father killed five decades ago, while the blood of those who were killed to fulfill her lust for power still remains fresh. This is a new discourse. Sheikh Hasina's rule was riddled with flaws. Innumerable people were victim of her arrogance and her vengeance. There is need for such evil politics to come to an end.
In recent years Awami League spread hatred about their political opponent Ziaur Rahman, the founder of BNP. They denied that Ziaur Rahman has been a freedom fighter. This hurt many people and so naturally there will be counter reaction to that. That befell the house on Road 32. Nothing healthy emanates from the politics of hate.

* Mohiuddin Ahmad is a writer and researcher
* This column appeared in the print and online edition of Prothom Alo and has been rewritten for the English edition by Ayesha Kabir