Asif Mahmud Shojib Bhuyain served as an advisor for almost the entire duration of Professor Yunus's interim government. He was appointed to the government as a representative of the students leading the July uprising. The students also had significant control and authority over the government. There is ample reason to consider Asif Mahmud a powerful member of the interim government as an advisor. He suddenly raised the issue of the ''deep state'' during the interim government era. He claimed that the deep state had proposed to keep the interim government in power until 2029.
Now the question arises, to what extent is Asif Mahmud's claim true? Or is it an attempt at self-justification? He stated, "We did not agree to that. We always prioritised democracy, and the interim government was committed to it, which is why the election took place. To ensure the election was not questioned, we ourselves stepped down proactively." If his statement is true, then the allegation is serious.
The ''deep state'' generally refers to powers that operate outside the visible government or legal power structure. These forces, positioned beyond elected, legal, or constitutional institutions, often exert influence over the government through administrative, security, military, or intelligence agencies or are employed by the government for various purposes. In most cases, these actions lack legal foundation and accountability.
An explanation of the deep state can be found in the book The Deep State by former US administrative official and author Mike Lofgren. According to him, the deep state is an ambiguous structure that comprises significant parts of the government, like bureaucracy, financial power (like Wall Street), and the military industry, operating without direct public consent.
The US government, as we know, does not just govern its own country; it maintains global authority. In international contexts, the deep state plays a significant role in adopting, determining, and implementing various strategies and policies. Lofgren believes the deep state is not a secret circle. To him, it is a visible, institutional, and deeply rooted structure that includes various agencies like the CIA, NASA, or the Pentagon, private contractors, and even lobbyists. Given these considerations, Lofgren's explanation does not provide a general definition of the deep state but is based solely on the concept of the American deep state.
In reality, the deep state is not a singular structure, and its concept is not new. Different forms of the deep state are observed in various countries. In nations like Turkey, Egypt, or Pakistan, the strong role of the deep state is known.
Typically, in countries with weak democracies or authoritarian regimes, governments use the deep state to maintain their power and suppress opposition. Actions that no government can legally undertake are carried out by deep state operatives within different state institutions. Governments rarely acknowledge or take responsibility for these covert acts or misconducts. There are instances where the deep state has played a role in overthrowing authoritarian rulers.
During Sheikh Hasina's 15 years of authoritarian rule, incidents like extrajudicial killings, enforced disappearances, or detentions in secret were orchestrated through the deep state. These actions were carried out by operatives embedded within various law enforcement and military-civilian intelligence agencies. Decisions about whom to disappear, whom to kill in crossfire, or whom to detain secretly were made and executed as part of deep state operations.
For governments in countries with weak democracies like ours, the deep state serves as an effective tool. They utilise the deep state in various ways. The opposition calls for a strike, and buses are set on fire, purportedly by intelligence operatives. Because, if life and property are damaged, the opposition can be blamed. The deep state has always been active in Bangladesh, not just under Sheikh Hasina's authoritarian regime. Every government has used them. However, during Sheikh Hasina's rule, it exceeded all bounds. Her government became entirely dependent on the deep state. She conducted three fraudulent elections with the deep state's assistance.
Members of the deep state usually work from important positions within the state apparatus and often remain beyond reach even after a change in government. As a result, a certain continuity in policy-making is maintained. Their actions are justified by citing national security, stability, or state interests, and their activities are kept secret.
Following the mass uprising, many involved in killings, disappearances, or human rights violations on behalf of the deep state have been detained. They are facing trials for crimes against humanity. Many have fled. However, the deep state is such a structure that interrupting its activities is challenging. It would be naive to think they were inactive during the interim government. But the question here is, what role did they play during that period?
According to Asif Mahmud's statement, the deep state wanted to keep the interim government in power until 2029 in exchange for protecting certain specific interests. This proposal was made at various times in the early months (three, four, and five months) of the interim government. It is also claimed by Asif Mahmud that the proposal included legitimising the activities of the fascist regime of the Awami League.
In Asif Mahmud's words, "They (the deep state) had certain conditions for facilitating some areas for them. And they had also prepared an entire roadmap, showing that BNP leaders already had convictions; hence, they couldn't contest elections even if elections were held normally. So, the lengthening of their convictions through the courts... Tarique Rahman himself had a conviction. If he remained in a convicted state, he wouldn't be able to participate in elections in Bangladesh even if elections were held."
The deep state may be a reality. But ultimately, nothing can remain beyond accountability. Replying to a question from Prothom Alo, Asif Mahmud said, "The deep state included many foreign elements. Therefore, I do not want to specify anyone's name." If there is no courage to disclose the names when making allegations, it is natural to question the validity of the claims. On the other hand, if Asif Mahmud's claims are true, then the deep state's role during the interim regime was against national interests and democracy. Now, we need to know who were active in this ‘deep state’ during the interim government's time. How ‘deep’ (profound) was their influence or power? Where are they now?
During the interim government, names have been heard of parts of the state apparatus like military-civilian bureaucracy or intelligence agencies, or some not formally associated with the government, who were reportedly influential. They manipulated various strings. These activities too fall within the realm of the deep state. The deep state that Asif Mahmud refers to, do these names appear there as well? Or were these names exempt from the deep state he mentioned? Asif Mahmud should clarify the matter.
We believe the current elected government should investigate this ‘interim deep state’. Identify individuals associated with it. If they have engaged or even attempted to engage in any illegal acts or misconduct, bring them to justice. National security, stability, or state interests have never justified or excused past deep state wrongdoings, and won't in the future either.
#AKM Zakaria is a deputy editor at Prothom Alo
#The views expressed are the author’s own.
*This article, originally published in Prothom Alo print and online editions, has been rewritten in English by Rabiul Islam