Post Khaleda era for Bangladesh

[Riyad]

Something is very wrong with her face. Where is her eyebrow?

 

[Saiful Islam]

She is clearly of foreign Islamic stock llwhich explains her fair skin

If that is foreign look then no thanks. And what is up with your name? I don't think you guys deserve the name "Bihari Muslim" and shouldn't exist until you have spilt blood and created militias like Bangladesh to establish a Bengali Muslim state.

 

[Md Akmal]

She is clearly of foreign Islamic stock llwhich explains her fair skin

@ Her paternal forefathers are from Feni and they came from Arab. Her maternal relatives were settled in Panchagor (Thakurgaon) and they in turn were evicted from Murshidabad.

@ Lately her maternal relatives were known as "T" family and they used to get some sort of allowances from the British Government and they were free to visit London whenever they wished. Many took the advantages and settled in UK and many brought English wife. Why it is known a "T" family I have no idea.

@ So, Murshidabadi family means came from Iran and so the conclusion is she has a mixture of blood of Iran and Arab. By the way, I am not making fun here, it is a reasonable assumption.

 

[24 Hours]

@ Her paternal forefathers are from Feni and they came from Arab. Her maternal relatives were settled in Panchagor (Thakurgaon) and they in turn were evicted from Murshidabad.

@ Lately her maternal relatives were known as "T" family and they used to get some sort of allowances from the British Government and they were free to visit London whenever they wished. Many took the advantages and settled in UK and many brought English wife. Why it is known a "T" family I have no idea.

@ So, Murshidabadi family means came from Iran and so the conclusion is she has a mixture of blood of Iran and Arab. By the way, I am not making fun here, it is a reasonable assumption.

Being an MD do you think that maybe Bangladeshis one day undergo wide genealogical testing one day so we can find definite answers?

 

[kalu_miah]

The response to my OP for this thread was interesting but sort of predictable. Our dear friend and older brother @Md Akmal got upset, thinking that I am no longer in their ranks. I would argue that I was never in anyone's ranks to begin with. At different points in time, I support strategies that I believe is best for people of Bangladesh and their future. I change my stand with the passing of time, due to changed situations. Another reason for this inconsistency is because as an expat I lack full data of ground situation in Bangladesh as I am not a participant or an insider in the political process in Bangladesh, which makes it harder for me to predict future events with any clarity. Even with full information it is hard to predict the future.

Some members as usual engaged in shooting the messenger as opposed to looking at the message. And some tried to convince me of their version of narrative rather than calling a spade a spade. Only a few got what I am trying to say @extra terrestrial being one of them as I can tell from his response, perhaps because he is in Bangladesh and knows about our situation better than others.

@Joe Shearer , I am curious about your opinion about the OP and this supplemental post, I will appreciate your kind response.

I will try to further clarify the picture, may be my first attempt in OP was not very good. First of all, an admission, lately I came to the realization that India did us a great favor to seperate us from former West Pakistan, as both of our people do not feel that we were meant to be part of one country. I think it is now a well established consensus between Bangladeshi's and Pakistani's here in the forum that we should have never been one country and we would both be better off if we were seperated since 1947. If this is true then India did both of our nations a big favor to seperate us. Both Pakistan and Bangladesh should thank India for this role. I personally thank India for this, knowing what I know now, after reading so many people's posts here in this forum, specially from young generation of educated Pakistani's. This does not mean we wish them anything bad, but they are just another Muslim country on the face of the globe to us, except for the fact that unlike others we have some unfortunate past with them. So whether or not they become another brotherly Muslim country for us or not, depends on their future actions, how they view and deal with that unfortunate past.

With that out of the way, lets start with what happened after 1971, or from the beginning of 1972. Indian Army withdrew soon after the war ended. Mujib Bahini became Rakkhi Bahini. The freedom fighters or Mukti Bahini evolved into Bangladesh Army. But not all armed fighters gave up their arms. A group of communist/nationalists called Sorbo Hara Party (Sorbo Hara literally means destitute, people who had lost all their material possessions), led by a fire brand communist engineer Shiraj Shikdar, remained at large and refused to disarm despite repeated request by Sheikh Mujib. They considered Mujib to be an Indian stooge. It is not just them, but a huge part of the Mukti Bahini who were socialists led by people like Colonel Taher, Colonel Ziauddin, Major Jalil who later formed JSD (Jatiyo Samajtantrik Dal), also did not like Mujib's close relation with India. Inu I believe was part of this JSD group, which also included people from Chatra Union a much older student communist organization.

Sheikh Mujib himself I believe was neither left wing, nor right wing, I think he was a centrist. He had close connections with the US before 1971. After 1971, I believe he was close to both India and the US, countries who supported his efforts to crush the socialists/communist freedom fighters who refused to give up arms using Rakkhi Bahini. Ironically he was not killed by these socialists/communits ( Inu being one of them) but by a right wing group within Awami League, led by Mushtaq Ahmed, a close friend of Mujib and a founding member of AL, perhaps with knowledge of the US. Mushtaq became the ruler for 6 months, but soon he was toppled in a coup by Major General Khaled Mosharraf, another freedom fighter, who was close to Awami League and India. But within a span of a few weeks, he was toppled by the JSD leaning anti-India communist/socialist group within the Army led by Colonel Taher. Colonel Taher, in a compromise move, handed power over to a popular Major General Zia, another freedom fighter. I believe this was done to placate more right wing part of the Armed forces and thus to keep unity within the Armed forces which was largely anti-India and anti-AL and was neglected during Mujib's rule. But the move backfired. Colonel Taher was hanged for the killing of a large number of Army officers in the coup and this event I believe created a division between the two major groups of freedom fighters within Mukti Bahini, the right wing and the left.wing. @Md Akmal @asad71 @extra terrestrial and others, please correct me if I am wrong with these historical accounts and the narrative that I am presenting here.

Zia ruled till 1981, and after his assassination, General Ershad came to power and remained in power for a decade till 1991. In 1991 both BNP led by Khaleda Zia and AL led by Sheikh Hasina together went for a huge street protest and eventually were able to bring down Ershad's rule. Since then both KZ and SH alternately won election and ruled Bangladesh till the 2007 coup that brought General Moeen to power. Moeen tried the minus 2 formula (removing both SH and KZ from the political scene) and even tried to get Dr. Yunus to form a party, but it did not work. He evetually made a deal with AL and left for the US, after AL won the election in 2009. 57 Army officers were killed in a BDR mutiny in 2009, a few months after the election and before General Moeen left for the USA. Soon a constitutional amendment was passed in the AL dominated parliament to abolish the Caretaker Govt. provision and the International War Crimes Tribunal was started, which is still ongoing, to try war-criminals from 1971 war.

Where does India fit into this tug of war for power between centrist, left and right wing groups. After 1971, India had a tremendous influence in Bangladesh through AL leaders who formed Bangladesh govt. in exile in Mujib nagar in the 1971 war, but this influence was diminished after the killing of Sheikh Mujib and four of his close associates in the "jail killing" incident in 1975. After the death of Zia in 1981, India I believe diligently worked to rebuild its influence within Bangladesh. One important thing we saw is that the leftist group that was defeated by centrist Mujib and right wing Zia, which used to be very nationalistic and anti-India before, now joined forces with AL in an alliance and are currently a major part of the 14 party ruling alliance. I believe this group is currently led by Inu, a young student leader back in 1971. Not sure how this happened and whether India had any role in this, but this is very interesting to note. What happened next was sweet revenge for this left wing group when they, together with AL, were able to maintain power in 2014 election that was boycotted by BNP/Jamat 20 party alliance. Since that victory, right wing BNP/Jamat leaders and activists are now on the run and many lost lives in a series of crack down in response to hartals (noncooperation) and street protests.

Going forward, how will the future look for Bangladesh? As I mentioned in OP, Indian help and support during the latest election in Jan. 2014 was instrumental in the AL win and later stabilization of the country in the face of many hartals and street protests by opposition political parties. Now that Khaleda Zia led opposition is pretty much crushed, what lies in our future.

Option 1. The opposition activists and supporters may continue to oppose Sheikh Hasina led AL rule, but my best estimate is that they will fail to make a dent in her rule, as she has strong support base within the security forces like the police, BGB, RAB etc., as well as the Armed forces. She also has strong diplomatic support from countries like India and Russia. Although the US and EU did not initially like the 2014 election, after what happened in Iraq, Libya and Syria, where replacing relatively more secular authoritarian regimes resulted in chaos led by various stripes of extremists, I think they are not so hopeful about democracy in Muslim countries. So yes they are continuing to say that they prefer to see a more "inclusive democracy", but they are really not actively pushing for it and are kind of ok with the status quo.

Option 2. Opposition activists and supporters can slowly join forces with AL and make a strong national united group under AL led alliance, which will effectively be a single party that will dominate the political scene with some weak opposition parties remaining such as JP and a residual BNP led by KZ. This is the approach that I support for the greater benefit of Bangladesh national interest.

Why do I support Option 2? It is because I predict the following scenario will develop in the future, if a major portion of the opposition activists and workers choose option 2.

Once the AL led alliance in the single party system becomes strong enough, without any effective opposition, they may no longer need help from India as before. Eventually this may result in a situation where they will slowly distance themselves from India. This will endear them further with Bangladesh population and ensure their future rule within this new single dominant party era for Bangladesh provided that they can keep corruption in check and manage the country affairs well towards greater development and economic growth. So keeping this possibility in mind, I believe for greater national interest, it is time to dump KZ and her son by opposition political activists and join the AL led alliance of parties. Also, most people in Bangladesh do politics for financial benefit, so most will naturally choose this approach that will maximize their financial benefit and future well being. If I am not mistaken this process has already started, many field level BNP activists have joined AL. What I am doing with this article is providing justification for this move for the people who still could not decide what to do in the future and whether this move is in their personal and national interest. I am also asking AL to be open and welcoming about these opposition activists, specially with those who they believe they can trust.

We can look at the picture from 1991 in this angle. Two dominant parties fought from 1991 to 2009 elections and in every election, the people voted the incumbent party out of power because of their faulty rule. But in 2014, AL was able to finally upset this trend which was achieved with decades long help and guidance from India. Now between these two boxers in the ring, one became injured, defeated and is currently in coma. Since there is no hope for recovery from this coma that BNP/Jamat is in, I propose that we, the people of Bangladesh, specifically the opposition activists and supporters should switch allegiance to AL and put BNP/Jamat out of their misery, effectively making BNP like JP and banning Jamat altogether as a Salafi Islamist organization which can become extremist in the future. Only AL left in the boxing ring, AL will no longer need much help from India and will soon start to resent any dictat from them. It may happen with Hasina during her rule, or it may not. We have to keep in mind that when her father and whole family were killed, India gave her shelter, helped her to come back to politics in Bangladesh and to reach the position she is in today. It is possible that they may also have brought the left wing politicians into AL. So it is hard to see how she may distance herself from India after all that they have done for her. But with only one dominant party left in Bangladesh, this I believe will happen eventually with her, or a future new AL leader. I think the personality itself is not important, but what is important is that when someone is strong enough to stand on their own feet, they will naturally refuse any help from others and become more independent and sovereign and more closer to the wishes of the people and care much more for the well being of the people of the country. Is it not what we want for our future? An independent and sovereign country who can chart their own course for the best interest of the people?

The question may come up that AL is secular and anti-Muslim, I would say that this will change with time. When AL becomes less dependent on India and more dependent on the people of Bangladesh, then AL priorities and ideologies are bound to change, nothing is set in stone. They will have to adapt to changed situations. There is no last word in politics and change is the only constant.

Now Indians may start accusing me of being anti-Indian. But this is not true. At this moment in time, I am truly thankful to India because they helped us to seperate from former West Pakistan and we have now our own independent country. We as a country and people should hold India's best interest in our heart for this reason alone and not desire any harm for India. However, undue influence is never welcome by any country. The US influence have caused resentment in South America, but eventually they have now mostly broken free from that influence and the leftover is a lingering feeling of resentment. So Indian policy makers need to be careful about the policies they choose for their neighbor countries, they have to judge carefully whether imposing their will may cause harm to the long term relation between the countries and people's in question. If India is a proudly democratic country, is it wise for them to undermine democracy in other countries for the sake of apparent short term interest which may eventually hurt the long term interest of India itself by creating resentment in affected population? In any event, we cannot change the past, what has happened has already happened. We may not be able to salvage our "imperfect democracy" for some decades, but at least from this point on, as Bangladesh tries to unite under Sheikh Hasina and AL as the single dominant party, we hope that India will slowly withdraw and allow this process to take place and let Sheikh Hasina become a truly independent leader of a sovereign Bangladesh.

 

[Kaniska]

The response to my OP for this thread was interesting but sort of predictable. Our dear friend and older brother @Md Akmal got upset, thinking that I am no longer in their ranks. I would argue that I was never in anyone's ranks to begin with. At different points in time, I support strategies that I believe is best for people of Bangladesh and their future. I change my stand with the passing of time, due to changed situations. Another reason for this inconsistency is because as an expat I lack full data of ground situation in Bangladesh as I am not a participant or an insider in the political process in Bangladesh, which makes it harder for me to predict future events with any clarity. Even with full information it is hard to predict the future.

Some members as usual engaged in shooting the messenger as opposed to looking at the message. And some tried to convince me of their version of narrative rather than calling a spade a spade. Only a few got what I am trying to say @extra terrestrial being one of them as I can tell from his response, perhaps because he is in Bangladesh and knows about our situation better than others.

@Joe Shearer , I am curious about your opinion about the OP and this supplemental post, I will appreciate your kind response.

I will try to further clarify the picture, may be my first attempt in OP was not very good. First of all, an admission, lately I came to the realization that India did us a great favor to seperate us from former West Pakistan, as both of our people do not feel that we were meant to be part of one country. I think it is now a well established consensus between Bangladeshi's and Pakistani's here in the forum that we should have never been one country and we would both be better off if we were seperated since 1947. If this is true then India did both of our nations a big favor to seperate us. Both Pakistan and Bangladesh should thank India for this role. I personally thank India for this, knowing what I know now, after reading so many people's posts here in this forum, specially from young generation of educated Pakistani's. This does not mean we wish them anything bad, but they are just another Muslim country on the face of the globe to us, except for the fact that unlike others we have some unfortunate past with them. So whether or not they become another brotherly Muslim country for us or not, depends on their future actions, how they view and deal with that unfortunate past.

With that out of the way, lets start with what happened after 1971, or from the beginning of 1972. Indian Army withdrew soon after the war ended. Mujib Bahini became Rakkhi Bahini. The freedom fighters or Mukti Bahini evolved into Bangladesh Army. But not all armed fighters gave up their arms. A group of communist/nationalists called Sorbo Hara Party (Sorbo Hara literally means destitute, people who had lost all their material possessions), led by a fire brand communist engineer Shiraj Shikdar, remained at large and refused to disarm despite repeated request by Sheikh Mujib. They considered Mujib to be an Indian stooge. It is not just them, but a huge part of the Mukti Bahini who were socialists led by people like Colonel Taher, Colonel Ziauddin, Major Jalil who later formed JSD (Jatiyo Samajtantrik Dal), also did not like Mujib's close relation with India. Inu I believe was part of this JSD group, which also included people from Chatra Union a much older student communist organization.

Sheikh Mujib himself I believe was neither left wing, nor right wing, I think he was a centrist. He had close connections with the US before 1971. After 1971, I believe he was close to both India and the US, countries who supported his efforts to crush the socialists/communist freedom fighters who refused to give up arms using Rakkhi Bahini. Ironically he was not killed by these socialists/communits ( Inu being one of them) but by a right wing group within Awami League, led by Mushtaq Ahmed, a close friend of Mujib and a founding member of AL, perhaps with knowledge of the US. Mushtaq became the ruler for 6 months, but soon he was toppled in a coup by Major General Khaled Mosharraf, another freedom fighter, who was close to Awami League and India. But within a span of a few weeks, he was toppled by the JSD leaning anti-India communist/socialist group within the Army led by Colonel Taher. Colonel Taher, in a compromise move, handed power over to a popular Major General Zia, another freedom fighter. I believe this was done to placate more right wing part of the Armed forces and thus to keep unity within the Armed forces which was largely anti-India and anti-AL and was neglected during Mujib's rule. But the move backfired. Colonel Taher was hanged for the killing of a large number of Army officers in the coup and this event I believe created a division between the two major groups of freedom fighters within Mukti Bahini, the right wing and the left.wing. @Md Akmal @asad71 @extra terrestrial and others, please correct me if I am wrong with these historical accounts and the narrative that I am presenting here.

Zia ruled till 1981, and after his assassination, General Ershad came to power and remained in power for a decade till 1991. In 1991 both BNP led by Khaleda Zia and AL led by Sheikh Hasina together went for a huge street protest and eventually were able to bring down Ershad's rule. Since then both KZ and SH alternately won election and ruled Bangladesh till the 2007 coup that brought General Moeen to power. Moeen tried the minus 2 formula (removing both SH and KZ from the political scene) and even tried to get Dr. Yunus to form a party, but it did not work. He evetually made a deal with AL and left for the US, after AL won the election in 2009. 57 Army officers were killed in a BDR mutiny in 2009, a few months after the election and before General Moeen left for the USA. Soon a constitutional amendment was passed in the AL dominated parliament to abolish the Caretaker Govt. provision and the International War Crimes Tribunal was started, which is still ongoing, to try war-criminals from 1971 war.

Where does India fit into this tug of war for power between centrist, left and right wing groups. After 1971, India had a tremendous influence in Bangladesh through AL leaders who formed Bangladesh govt. in exile in Mujib nagar in the 1971 war, but this influence was diminished after the killing of Sheikh Mujib and four of his close associates in the "jail killing" incident in 1975. After the death of Zia in 1981, India I believe diligently worked to rebuild its influence within Bangladesh. One important thing we saw is that the leftist group that was defeated by centrist Mujib and right wing Zia, which used to be very nationalistic and anti-India before, now joined forces with AL in an alliance and are currently a major part of the 14 party ruling alliance. I believe this group is currently led by Inu, a young student leader back in 1971. Not sure how this happened and whether India had any role in this, but this is very interesting to note. What happened next was sweet revenge for this left wing group when they, together with AL, were able to maintain power in 2014 election that was boycotted by BNP/Jamat 20 party alliance. Since that victory, right wing BNP/Jamat leaders and activists are now on the run and many lost lives in a series of crack down in response to hartals (noncooperation) and street protests.

Going forward, how will the future look for Bangladesh? As I mentioned in OP, Indian help and support during the latest election in Jan. 2014 was instrumental in the AL win and later stabilization of the country in the face of many hartals and street protests by opposition political parties. Now that Khaleda Zia led opposition is pretty much crushed, what lies in our future.

Option 1. The opposition activists and supporters may continue to oppose Sheikh Hasina led AL rule, but my best estimate is that they will fail to make a dent in her rule, as she has strong support base within the security forces like the police, BGB, RAB etc., as well as the Armed forces. She also has strong diplomatic support from countries like India and Russia. Although the US and EU did not initially like the 2014 election, after what happened in Iraq, Libya and Syria, where replacing relatively more secular authoritarian regimes resulted in chaos led by various stripes of extremists, I think they are not so hopeful about democracy in Muslim countries. So yes they are continuing to say that they prefer to see a more "inclusive democracy", but they are really not actively pushing for it and are kind of ok with the status quo.

Option 2. Opposition activists and supporters can slowly join forces with AL and make a strong national united group under AL led alliance, which will effectively a single party will dominate the political scene with some weak opposition parties remaining such as JP and a residual BNP led by KZ. This is the approach that I support for the greater benefit of Bangladesh national interest.

Why do I support Option 2? It is because I predict the following scenario will develop in the future, if a major portion of the opposition activists and workers choose option 2.

Once the AL led alliance in the single party system becomes strong enough, without any effective opposition, they may no longer need help from India as before. Eventually this may result in a situation where they will slowly distance themselves from India. This will endear them further with Bangladesh population and ensure their future rule within this new single dominant party era for Bangladesh provided that they can keep corruption in check and manage the country affairs well towards greater development and economic growth. So keeping this possibility in mind, I believe for greater national interest, it is time to dump KZ and her son by opposition political activists and join the AL led alliance of parties. Also, most people in Bangladesh do politics for financial benefit, so most will naturally choose this approach that will maximize their financial benefit and future well being. If I am not mistaken this process has already started, many field level BNP activists have joined AL. What I am doing with this article is providing justification for this move for the people who still could not decide what to do in the future and whether this move is in their personal and national interest. I am also asking AL to be open and welcoming about these opposition activists, specially those who they believe they can trust.

We can look at the picture from 1991 in this angle. Two dominant parties fought from 1991 to 2009 elections and in every election, the people voted the incumbent party out of power because of their faulty rule. But in 2014, AL was able to finally upset this trend which was achieved with decade long help and direction from India. Now between these two boxers in the ring, one became injured, defeated and is currently in coma. Since there is no hope for recovery from this coma that BNP/Jamat is in, I propose that we, the people of Bangladesh, specifically the opposition activists and supporters should switch allegiance to AL and put BNP/Jamat out of their misery, effectively making BNP like JP and banning Jamat altogether as a Salafi Islamist organization which can become extremist in the future. Only AL left in the boxing ring, AL will no longer need much help from India and will soon start to resent any dictat from them. It may happen with Hasina during her rule, or it may not. We have to keep in mind that when her father and whole family were killed, India gave her shelter, helped her to come back to politics in Bangladesh and to reach the position she is in today. It is possible that they may also have brought the left wing politicians into AL. So it is hard to see how she may distance herself from India after all that they have done for her. But with only one dominant party left in Bangladesh, this I believe will happen eventually with her, or a future new AL leader. I think the personality itself is not important, but what is important is that when someone is strong enough to stand on their own feet, they will naturally refuse any help from others and become more independent and sovereign and more closer to the wishes of the people and care much more for the well being of the people of the country. Is it not what we want for our future? An independent and sovereign country who can chart their own course for the best interest of the people?

The question may come up that AL is secular and anti-Muslim, I would say that this will change with time. When AL becomes less dependent on India and more dependent on the people of Bangladesh, then AL priorities and ideologies are bound to change, nothing is set in stone. They will have to adapt to changed situations. There is no last word in politics and change is the only constant.

Now Indians may start accusing me of being anti-Indian. But this is not true. At this moment in time, I am truly thankful to India because they helped us to seperate from former West Pakistan and we have now our own independent country. We as a country and people should hold India's best interest in our heart for this reason alone and not desire any harm for India. However, undue influence is never welcome by any country. The US influence have caused resentment in South America, but eventually they have now mostly broken free from that influence and the leftover is a lingering feeling of resentment. So Indian policy makers need to be careful about the policies they choose for their neighbor countries, they have to judge carefully whether imposing their will may cause harm to the long term relation between the countries and people's in question. If India is a proudly democratic country, is it wise for them to undermine democracy in other countries for the sake of apparent short term interest which may eventually hurt the long term interest of India itself by creating resentment in affected population? In any event, we cannot change the past, what has happened has already happened. We may not be able to salvage our "imperfect democracy" for some decades, but at least from this point on, as Bangladesh tries to unite under Sheikh Hasina and AL as the single dominant party, we hope that India will slowly withdraw and allow this process to take place and let Sheikh Hasina become a truly independent leader of a sovereign Bangladesh.

This thread is very informative...I would like to say thanks for such meaningful thread..Although you are always anti Indian in your stance, still then your posts are well read by me...

 

[Zabaniyah]

@kalu_miah

Have you ever read the book The Prince by an Italian diplomat and political theorist Niccolò Machiavelli? The book states that no government is perfect. And no matter how good/bad the government is, people will continue to put up some degree of resistance because wants are unlimited. Those wants can easily become needs as a society evolves. The trick here is to keep people busy. Instead of thinking of a regime's 'misrule', people are kept busy. A man would rather think about getting to office on time other than participate in an anti-government demonstration.

If we notice the trend from the 80's and 90's, or even during the Pakistan-era, the will of common folks to put up anti-regime demonstrations in Bangladeshi society is low. An all time low. Fear of arrest or assassination could also be a factor, and yet Machiavelli's theory is not a far fetched one here. Bangladeshis are busy with their daily lives. They don't care about Bangladeshi politicians, and yet do dream about a clean nation.

Sure, a strong government is necessary. But so is a democracy for a society's progress. Yes, early stages can be turbulent, but in the long run it is the best.

One cannot leverage on religion alone to establish political goals. It's stupid and selfish.

The political system in Bangladesh has already become monopolistic partyarchy to a great extent and we are indeed moving towards a dominant party system. Honesty, no matter how much one hates her but Sheikh Hasina is indeed a very able leader and under her leadership, I believe, things won't go that wrong. And you are perhaps right, there would be a time when the government would feel that they no longer have to depend on external forces to stay on power. But the main concern here is the people in line to take on the power after Hasina.

Sheikh Hasina is already approaching her seventy; I'm not sure how much her health would permit her to work in future. And, as it looks, the persons who may take on after her, are far from being efficient. With so much authority, an inefficient leader is no less than a catastrophe to any nation. This is where democracy is required. A strong opposition and independent media won't let any government to go reckless.

The next 20 years are very much crucial for us, in the context of everything. We are a funny nation, it's really hard to predict what may happen in future...

Unlike the BNP, there are many in the AL can replace her easily should such a situation require so.

The key weakness of the current government is that it has, and still continuing to become too big to manage. It's expensive to run as well with almost no accountability. Many of whom are not even elected. The trend was there ever since after the 71' War. That trend is now in the military.

Bangladesh is currently the worst country to business in within South Asia. Even Nepal has a better business environment

Countries where a government is more concerned with maintaining power than developing the nation's critical areas are more likely to perform poorly on economic and social metrics in the long run. Examples are Brazil, South Africa, and even China where governments are more concerned with staying in power. Countries like India are more likely to go up the socioeconomic cycle due to Mr. Modi's determined efforts and the optimism and confidence surrounding the country unlike that in Bangladesh and the countries mentioned earlier.

As for foreign powers helping this government to stay in power, they cannot be ignored. And if the AL were smart, they would give some serious thought into it since these have long-term ramifications not only for the country, but for their power.

There is no good and bad. Just POWER!

 

[tested]

We as a country and people should hold India's best interest in our heart for this reason alone and not desire any harm for India.

And yet, BNP and Jamaat have in the past taken actions that have not just tried to harm India but literally dismember India.

It is for this reason that India is and will remain vehemently against Jamaat which we consider a snake and nothing but a Pakistani proxy in Bangladesh and BNP as an Pakistani financed party.

Go through this article in full if you are to understand why we are against these two:

BNP's current policy towards India | The Daily Star

BNP policy statement even declared the goal of separating North East from India.

India can not and will not stand by with such actions being taken against our people.

India is more than willing to go the extra mile for Awami League
1. Never would GoI have ever even dreamt of giving away 10,000 acres of land in a land boundary settlement. That it was passed in Parliament with zero opposition shows how much trust both parties of India have on Awami League. Heck we amended the Indian Constitution for Bangladesh.
India has not given even an inch of land to any other country.Pakistan after 4 wars has been unable to get even one square meter from India.

2. India accepted the maritime verdict in sea territory in Bay of Bengal which gave Bangladesh 2/3rd of the disputed area and India only 1/3rd . I remind you, that accepting the verdict was a choice and there are precedents where large and powerful countries have not accepted maritme verdicts.

3. GoI stopped building a dam on a river because of Bangladeshi concerns. Whenever Pakistan comes up with the same objections on rivers that pass from India to Pakistan, India builds them doubly fast and generally gives them the middle finger.

4. Offered Bangladesh(Govt) stake in strategic projects in India's North East. All the rest of India's neighbours are debarred from entering any strategic sector in India. Bangladesh has also taken up the offer and joint projects are on the anvil

5. BD's terrorists that slip into India are actively hounded by India and shot or given back just like India's terrorists that slip in BD are hounded by BD are either shot or given back.

Source: Nepal seeks help from Bangladesh | Page 3
------------------------------

If Bangladesh starts harbouring dreams of harming India under directions from terror loving countries like Pakistan(like it was under BNP and Jamaat), India will leave no stone unturned to bring harm to Bangladesh.

If Bangladesh is willing to be a good neighbour(like it has been for a while under AL) and work towards removal of poverty, well being and prosperity of the people of our region(collectively), India will go the extra mile and reciprocate.

And we can become great neighbours like US and Canada who take each other's concerns very seriously and work to remove problems.

 

[extra terrestrial]

Unlike the BNP, there are many in the AL can replace her easily should such a situation require so.

The key weakness of the current government is that it has, and still continuing to become too big to manage. It's expensive to run as well with almost no accountability. Many of whom are not even elected. The trend was there ever since after the 71' War. That trend is now in the military.

Bangladesh is currently the worst country to business in within South Asia. Even Nepal has a better business environment

Countries where a government is more concerned with maintaining power than developing the nation's critical areas are more likely to perform poorly on economic and social metrics in the long run. Examples are Brazil, South Africa, and even China where governments are more concerned with staying in power. Countries like India are more likely to go up the socioeconomic cycle due to Mr. Modi's determined efforts and the optimism and confidence surrounding the country unlike that in Bangladesh and the countries mentioned earlier.

As for foreign powers helping this government to stay in power, they cannot be ignored. And if the AL were smart, they would give some serious thought into it since these have long-term ramifications not only for the country, but for their power.

There is no good and bad. Just POWER!

Well, it's not about replacing Sheikh Hasina rather being as capable as her. Currently, almost all the major decisions are taken directly by the PMO, from major strategic matters to key infrastructural spending. These decisions have good influence of the set of 'advisers' who's roles are, according to many, no less than that of the 'Kashmiri Mafia' of Indira Gandhi. The decision to abolish the caretaker government system was met with heavy criticism even inside AL. But Hasina not only convinced them but also implemented it entirely. That requires some bold leadership quality. I doubt, the people in line to replace her are capable enough to demonstrate similar qualities...

What I'm assuming is that, when the time comes where AL would feel that they have consolidated their power enough, they would put their effort on the strategic thinking to reduce their dependence on the external forces. However, even that requires some bold leadership skills, which I think, is possessed only by Hasina at present. But, as I said earlier, things are hard to predict in Bangladesh.