Everyone is back to their own agendas after July

The quota movement, the mass uprising and the past one year has been a remarkable time for Bangladesh. The time has not come yet to reveal all the happenings.
There are many things pertaining to how the July movement emerged and its backdrop, that have not come to the fore as yet. There hasn't been the scope to being these matters forward because we are going through all sorts of political processes.

First the aspirations of the July uprising must be defined. The July uprising means different things to different people.

Our aim was to dismantle of the fascist system and the establishment of a new political arrangement. The fascist government has fallen, but the system itself has not collapsed or been dismantled. That system still remains intact. The political leadership of that system has stepped aside, and a new political leadership is now seeking to take control. But our struggle is against that very system. The old structure must be broken or transformed. In that regard, we haven’t achieved our goal yet. The revolutionary duty has been carried out, but we have not yet been able to build the new order.
Many view the July uprising merely as an event that led to the fall of a government. For them, the fall of Awami League is the achievement and July ends there. But for us, July actually begins from that point. In that sense, there are certainly things we have yet to achieve. The journey for this struggle and aspiration is ongoing.

During the uprising, there was a lack of preparation. Our leadership had various weaknesses and limitations. The anti-discrimination student movement was not an organised platform. When efforts were made to organise it after 5 August, obstacles emerged from various directions. As a result, it couldn’t be properly organised. We couldn't keep the students active on the ground with clear and effective programmes.
At the same time, we had to work both with the government and on the streets. From the government's side, the kind of control over power that was necessary couldn't be established. The unspoken or informal agreement that had formed among the students, the military, political parties, the government, and Professor Muhammad Yunus during the July uprising was broken. That unity fell apart. After July, everyone started following their own separate agendas. They couldn’t come together under a shared vision for restructuring the state. Although everyone stayed united until Sheikh Hasina’s fall, that unity didn’t last afterward. As a result, many of the opportunities we had could not be realised.
Another reason is that the same bureaucracy, the same military, the same media institutions, the same economic system, and the same oligarchs remained in place.

I'm not sure what role the military is playing in all this. They’re trying on the ground, yet why the police couldn't be made more active remains unclear... The police could have been much more effectively mobilised if students had been more active on the streets and strategically engaged. After 5 August, it was actually the students who reactivated many police stations. But efforts like new police recruitment and other measures couldn’t be carried out. Still, there has been significant improvement in law and order.
However, there is still doubt about whether this law enforcement structure or policing system can manage a situation like a national election.
We don’t agree with the way the term mob is being used to belittle people. Those being called a mob are actually agitated citizens. Various actors have manipulated or redirected them for personal or group agendas due to the absence of clear programmes and strong leadership. That’s also a limitation on our part. The government too failed to present any programme to channel the public in a constructive direction. The government also lacked a programme capable of guiding the people in a constructive direction.
People wanted a programme. They wanted to contribute to nation-building. But that wasn’t made possible. Instead, we saw old debates and factional politics dividing different parts of the uprising along ideological lines. Now those people are being labeled as a 'mob'.
In my view, what is being referred to as a 'mob' is not just a matter of policing or law and order. This will remain in Bangladesh for many more years — because these people are the student masses who took part in the uprising.

That only happens when the government itself isn’t proactive. As long as the student masses who led the uprising aren’t brought together and given proper leadership and direction, this kind of situation will persist. That’s exactly why we formed a political party—because we believed that the existing political parties wouldn't be able to accommodate those who led the uprising.

We believe that those who are preparing the list on behalf of the government should make it clear and officially announce that no further list is pending. If someone is missing, then they should be declared missing. If the process and criteria for compiling the list are made public, things would be much clearer.
The government has taken several initiatives for rehabilitation—for example, financial aid and budget allocations have already been made. But those benefits are not reaching the intended people in time due to mismanagement and bureaucratic complications. That said, the government should also take a more active role in preserving the history of July.

Power is a very important factor here. Some feel resentful that we were able to become advisers while they weren’t. Secondly, the way things are being viewed now is different from during the movement itself—we didn’t actually see so many student organisations actively involved at the time. The anti-discrimination student movement was never an all-party student platform.
All anti-fascist parties and student organisations were part of the uprising. But the failure to remain united afterward is not solely the fault of any one group. That said, I believe that for the sake of the nation, all parties involved in the uprising should maintain the kind of relationships and communication that would allow them to come together again when needed.

I’d rather not give a number. The political support this government needed came only from the students—no other party offered that support. On the other hand, the students themselves were not organised, and they weren’t allowed to be. Support from the military also didn’t come. So, on what foundation was the government supposed to operate?

Despite promising it twice, the government has failed to issue the July Declaration. They haven’t even clarified why they couldn’t deliver it. At this point, we no longer expect it from the government. We will prepare and announce the declaration ourselves, together with those who took part in the uprising and are willing to come forward. This will be done by 5 August.

In the beginning, there was no corruption. But after some time, corruption started again from the mid-level. We acknowledge that a segment of students got involved in this in various ways. The old system remained in place. Whenever the old actors found an opportunity, they reintroduced the old rules and practices. They involved a portion of the students in it. Many from student wings like Chhatra Dal and Chhatra Shibir also used the identity of the anti-discrimination student movement to engage in such activities.
However, more than what actually happened, there has been a great deal of misinformation and smear campaigns. This was deliberate. The intention was to portray the students as corrupt, undermine their moral credibility, and push them off the streets. A 'media trial' was conducted. In many cases, students were treated unfairly.

In the beginning, there was no corruption. But after some time, corruption started again from the mid-level. We acknowledge that a segment of students got involved in this in various ways. The old system remained in place. Whenever the old actors found an opportunity, they reintroduced the old rules and practices. They involved a portion of the students in it. Many from student wings like Chhatra Dal and Chhatra Shibir also used the identity of the anti-discrimination student movement to engage in such activities.
However, more than what actually happened, there has been a great deal of misinformation and smear campaigns. This was deliberate. The intention was to portray the students as corrupt, undermine their moral credibility, and push them off the streets. A 'media trial' was conducted. In many cases, students were treated unfairly.

Yes, we are receiving a strong response. There may be many limitations in our own performance. People want us to reach out to them, to clearly explain our political vision. But due to various complications, we’re struggling to do that effectively. Overall, I’d say the response from the public is there—we just have to prove ourselves.

It’s very unfortunate. Even when we were active in student politics at Dhaka University during the Awami League era, we were given this same 'label'. And it's still happening. The NCP aims to pursue centrist, democratic politics. We’ve clearly stated our position on issues like the Liberation War of 1971, Islam, and women’s rights.
I think there may be a gap in communication. Besides that, there is also an organised smear campaign against us.
Perhaps we haven’t been able to articulate our political vision or ideology clearly enough. On the other hand, many aren’t even interested in understanding what the students actually want. Some people are stuck in old frameworks or preconceived notions. It’s wrong to look at us through the Awami League’s framing.
One point needs to be made clear: civil society did not lead this mass uprising—although many individuals from civil society did participate. In fact, a large section of civil society enabled the rise of fascism. The uprising was led by ordinary students and the masses. We want to clarify our political stance to them.

It’s not about being for or against any particular party. We are opposed to the old political arrangement. The BNP doesn’t speak out against that arrangement—they’re simply trying to return to power through elections. If the BNP, or any party, tries to preserve the old setup or merely replace the Awami League, then they will naturally be seen as the 'new Awami League'. The BNP hasn’t clarified its political stance. It needs internal reform to align with a new political vision. On top of that, Jamaat-e-Islami has yet to clearly address the allegations of genocide in 1971. From that perspective, we’re seeing a return of old rhetoric and outdated political patterns.

The incident is being exaggerated and politically used against us. Something did happen, and we have taken action—it’s under process. But the way it has been publicised was clearly orchestrated. After the uprising, there were also attempts to tarnish the reputation of women leaders involved in the anti-discrimination student movement.
When the Awami League and members of various anti-fascist groups carried out smear campaigns against NCP’s women leaders, we didn’t see anyone step forward to help.
One of the moral driving forces behind the mass uprising was women. That’s why there has been, and continues to be, a concerted effort to remove women from the streets.

We haven’t made any decisions yet about forming an alliance or seat-sharing arrangements. We recently applied for registration. We’ll start thinking seriously about the election after 5 August. If the July Charter is finalised by then, that will be a major achievement for us—it would push the reform process forward. After that, we’ll move ahead with our election plans.
So far, we haven’t considered forming any alliance. Our priority is to build up the organisation. NCP wants to prove its capability independently. So, it's hard to say right now what decision we’ll make regarding the election.
However, if an opportunity for alliance arises—and there is ideological alignment—we may consider it. We are in contact with parties with whom we share common values. We’re also taking into account the role each party plays in the reform process.

There have been many attempts to push us back into the old system, and those attempts continue. Many want us to compromise by entering into seat-sharing or political deals in the traditional way. But we’re not doing that. That’s why there’s so much frustration directed at the students.
While holding official positions, the student advisers did not take any undue benefits. After stepping down from my advisory role, I disclosed my bank statements and asset information. Even while holding a ministerial role, I didn’t go on any foreign trips—not even necessary ones. So we deliberately avoided many perks and privileges while in office.

The new framework must be achieved—otherwise, the mass uprising will have failed. What’s the point of overthrowing the Awami League if we only end up with another version of the same?

Thank you as well.