Disclaimer: This essay offers a particular geopolitical perspective. I invite you to read it to gain insight into the current state of affairs, focusing more on objective analysis than on emotional or agitated viewpoints.
According to Bangladesh’s Home Minister, Asaduzzaman Khan, the ongoing conflict and violence related to the student movement for quota reform has tragically resulted around 150 fatalities. Among the deceased are students, police officers, leaders, activists of the Awami League, and individuals from various professions. In the days leading up to the nearly four-day-long outbreak of violence, it was evident that a bloody confrontation was imminent. The situation resembled two buses hurtling toward each other from opposite directions, destined for a catastrophic collision. Such a political maneuver was perilous for a nation like Bangladesh. Despite a few hoped that cooler heads would prevail, the reality proved otherwise. Attempting to suppress the student movement using force by political wings, followed by the police, Border Guard of Bangladesh (BGB), and finally the Bangladesh Army, was a risky strategy. On the other side, student protesters engaged in a zero-sum game, leaving little room for negotiation. Now, the movement has taken a dramatic turn, impacting not only the country but also the security of the entire region. An impartial investigation is necessary to address the many questions arising from the ground.
Student movements have historically been significant drivers of political, social, and educational change, and the 21st century has seen a variety of such movements addressing contemporary issues by leveraging online platforms for communication and organization. These movements often start with a specific issue that resonates deeply, such as educational costs, political corruption, or social injustice. Quota reform movement was organized against a socio-political injustice to enter government jobs. Online platforms like Facebook, YouTube, WhatsApp, X, and Telegram are used to spread awareness, share grievances, and connect with like-minded individuals, often leading to the emergence of charismatic or well-organized student leaders who articulate the movement’s goals. Emotional framing of issues can attract broader support, while public gatherings create momentum, attract media attention, and connect with broader social frustrations.
Social engineering, the act of manipulating people for strategic gain, often play a role in these movements, including creating fake news or amplifying existing biases to sway student sentiment and posing as allies to gain influence within the movement.
Historical movements like the May Fourth Movement in China, the Civil Rights Movement in the USA, and the May 1968 protests in Paris also highlight the enduring power of student activism. Foreign influences often shape these movements, with global ideologies like Marxism, feminism, environmentalism, and human rights discourses inspiring many. During the Cold War, both the USA and the USSR supported student movements aligned with their ideological goals, and today, the internet and social media have transformed how these movements organize and spread their messages. NGOs, who get funds from international donors, also play a supportive role by providing resources, training, and advocacy platforms.
Case studies of foreign influence include the 2000 Otpor! Movement in Serbia, which received US funding and helped overthrow Slobodan Milošević, the 2019 Hong Kong protests against a proposed extradition bill with accusations of foreign meddling, the 2011 Egyptian Revolution where social media played a significant role, the 2014 and latest Venezuelan protests fueled by the need for democracy with alleged US influence, the 2005 Rose Revolution in Georgia which saw a shift towards a pro-Western government with US support, the 2014 Euromaidan protests in Ukraine with accusations of Western meddling, the 2019-2020 protests in Belarus against election rigging, the 2019 Armenian Revolution led by Nikol Pashinyan, and the 2019 protests in Chile against economic inequalities with debates over foreign manipulation, specially from the US and their allies.
Considering the notable student movements in the 21st century and their interactions with external forces, we can discern a multifaceted political context within which the ongoing student protests in Bangladesh are unfolding. This context highlights several crucial factors.
Firstly, the protests erupted amidst widespread media allegations of government corruption. Secondly, the newly formed government is still navigating its role while simultaneously reassessing foreign relations with specific countries. Thirdly, mounting economic pressures are exacerbating public discontent due to rising costs of living. Fourthly, there is a concerted effort to manipulate public opinion against India. Fifthly, the opposition, including Islamist groups, has been suppressed in line with the global counterterrorism agenda. Sixthly, social media has significantly influenced young people, who often lack political maturity.
Finally, persistent attempts by domestic political factions and foreign entities to oust the Bangladeshi government have continued. The United States has previously sought to intervene in Bangladeshi politics, particularly before the election, but was unsuccessful. However, given its substantial resources and advanced capabilities, such efforts are likely to persist.
The prevailing conditions were highly conducive to those advocating for regime change. Recognizing that aligning the student protests with local political destabilizers could lead to street violence and ultimately the collapse of the regime, many social media influencers in Bangladesh remained silent or took sides with the protesters, anticipating a violent outcome. Instead of urging restraint, they exacerbated the crisis, fueling a desire for bloodshed even among fellow citizens. It seems that the bloodshed during Eid ul Adha was insufficient; they craved human suffering to satisfy their insatiable thirst. The student protests in Bangladesh heavily relied on social media, where platform algorithms amplified agitation and prompted user action. Fake news and disinformation significantly contributed to stirring public unrest against the government. Like many African countries, Bangladesh’s vast but not universally educated and less aware young population, lacking comprehensive knowledge of local politics, technology, economics, and international affairs, proved highly vulnerable to such misinformation. This susceptible youth, immersed in a semi-virtual existence, became the easiest prey.
One can argue that the entire protest was orchestrated and sustained through social media, as was evident when the nationwide internet blackout caused the protests and violence to lose momentum. Shutting down cellular internet significantly reduced casualties, preventing what could have escalated into a civil war with potentially thousands, if not millions, of lives lost. It is still very hard, if not impossible, to convince the majority of the young population of Bangladesh about the multidimensional consequences of their social media-based political movements.
As mentioned earlier, the regime change group has access to all the resources and tools necessary to persist in their efforts. In the latest carnage, they achieved several key objectives. Firstly, they succeeded in vilifying Sheikh Hasina, portraying her as a bloodthirsty dictator, and tarnishing the image of the Awami League both domestically and internationally. Secondly, they exacerbated societal divisions to such an extent that it becomes difficult for anyone to maintain friendships and social bonds. City centers become powder kegs of hatred, ready to unleash inferno anytime, without notice. Thirdly, they can now easily construct a cause for international trials and a severe international image crisis for the current government and its institutions on human rights abuse grounds. Fourthly, they developed a political narrative aimed at keeping the Awami League out of power for an uncertain period if it is overthrown. Fifthly, they strategically aligned themselves to negotiate with India, leveraging Dr. Yunus, who enjoys secular acceptance in India more than any opposition leader in Bangladesh. They aim to persuade India to alter its stance on the current government, which they now describe as dictatorial. Finally, they have made a step towards their goal of turning this geographical region into a buffer zone between China and India, as well as between India’s Northeast and Mainland India, thereby enhancing their strategic position in the Bay of Bengal under the broader Indo-Pacific Strategy.
————————————-
Rajeev Ahmed
Editor of geopolits.com and the author of the book Bengal Nexus.
English (United States) 
English (UK)