Bangladesh President says, Sheikh Hasina has not resigned

The interim radical backed Bangladesh has already called upon India to extradite Sheikh Hasina to face trial at the International Crime Tribunal. India will never do so.

As per WION TV, commenting on extradition of Sheikh Hasina, Law Advisor to the interim government Dr. Asif Nazrul said, Bangladesh would strongly protest if India tries to refuse the extradition of ousted Bangladeshi Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina by citing any provision in the treaty.

He further said, “India is bound to return Sheikh Hasina”. Well let people like Nazrul shout at the top of their voice but India will never extradite the PM of Bangladesh to face an “administration” installed by Islamist radicals.

India and Bangladesh signed an Extradition Treaty in 2013, which was amended in 2016 that allows both the countries to exchange fugitives. Under the treaty, a person accused must be punishable in both the countries.

However, there are exceptions to the rule, as the treaty says, the extradition request can be refused if the offense is of political nature. As far as India is considered, PM Hasina is not a fugitive but deposed by an illegal coup.

India will just refuse Hasina’s extradition on the ground that the accusations made against her are not in good faith in the interest of justice.

We Indians are not worried by reaction of an illegal government and its radical backers including a foreign power.

Former senior official of India’s R&AW, NK Sood in an exclusive interview to Blitz said, “India will never extradite Sheikh Hasina. We have Extradition Treaty with many countries, but decisions are always made by us”.

Meanwhile, in an exclusive report published in a vernacular weekly named “JonotarChokh” [People’s Eye], its Chief Editor Matiur Rahman Chowdhury revealed shocking information about the departure of Sheikh Hasina.

According to the report, Sheikh Hasina did not resign; instead, she was allegedly forced to leave the country and was also not allowed to deliver a message to the nation prior to leaving Bangladesh.

Matiur Rahman Chowdhury also met President Muhammad Shahabuddin Chuppu and asked – if Sheikh Hasina resigned before leaving the country, or if there is any resignation letter available with him. In response, President Shahabuddin said, he has not received any resignation letter.

Chowdhury further said, there is no existence of any resignation letter with the Cabinet Division.

The implications of such stunning revelation are significant, especially as Bangladesh finds itself at a critical juncture in its political history.

The country has long been marred by political turmoil, and this new development, further fluids the already fragile political landscape.It has long been assumed that Muhammad Yunus, the Chief Advisor of the interim government, is aligned with pro-American policies by his allies within Democratic Party as well as his decades-old relations with George Soros.

This perception was grounded in his close ties with Western financial and political institutions. However, the reality is now being exposed as more complex.

Evidence suggests that there is an ultra-Islamist faction within the interim government, a force that has been gaining power and influence behind the scenes.

Furthermore, influential members of the Yunus administration are publicly denying Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman as the Father of the Nation stating there are “many founding fathers” of the “revolution” that resulted in the ouster of Sheikh Hasina.

A notable example of the influence or rise of ultra-Islamists was seen following the death of Hamas kingpin Yahya Sinwar, when a large procession and janaza (funeral prayer) took place at Dhaka University campuses, participated by large number of youths chanting “death to Israel”, “death to America” and “from river to sea, Palestine will be free” slogans using several loudspeakers.

Such events, especially within a country’s educational institution, are not only reflective of significant influence of extremist force but are also indicative of tacit approval from the current interim government led by Muhammad Yunus.

The increasing visibility of religious forces and events underlines the growing power of religious fundamentalism within the current political framework, raising questions about the real objectives of those in power.

The alignment of an ostensibly pro-American cabinet with bigotry forces creates a troubling paradox, suggesting that the interim government is not as secular or Western-aligned as once thought.

Instead, it is creating space for fundamentalist and religious extremist groups to assert themselves politically. This has far-reaching consequences, not only for Bangladesh’s democratic fabric but also for its future international relations, particularly with India, the United States, Russia and China.At the same time, “reforms” promised by the interim government are increasingly being viewed as efforts to undermine democracy rather than restore it.

In a recent statement, MahfujAlam, the special assistant to the Chief Adviser, claimed that those who participated in the last three elections, including the parliamentary election in 2018, had deceived the people, and the interim government would obstruct their future participation in politics.

Alam told journalists, “Those who had taken part in the last three elections and come to parliament illegally deceived the people, and the interim government will of course put obstacles to their political participation. You will see how these barriers will come into effect.

It has a legal aspect and it has an administrative aspect – you will see it soon. These things will become clearer when the election process starts”.

Media reports said, at the dialogue with Chief Adviser Prof Muhammad Yunus, some parties yesterday demanded banning the Awami League and its allies or at least keeping them from taking part in the next national election.

This statement is particularly concerning because it targets all major political parties in Bangladesh, including the Awami League. These parties have been the cornerstones of Bangladesh’s political landscape for decades, despite their flaws and allegations of corruption.

The intention of the interim government appears to be to depoliticize Bangladesh, pushing it into an era of autocratic rule dominated by either new, unproven political actors or a so-called “king’s party” that will rubber-stamp the decisions of those in power.

The exclusion of mainstream political parties raises concerns about the future of democracy in Bangladesh. Such a move suggests that the interim government is not interested in restoring the democratic process, but rather in consolidating its own power by limiting political competition.

This trajectory, if left unchecked, could lead to the erosion of fundamental democratic institutions, giving rise to a pseudo-fascism where elections exist but serve only to legitimize an authoritarian regime.

Stunningly, America, which publicly claimed to have supported the interim government of Yunus for “restoring democracy” is absolutely silent on these disturbing developments.

Another aspect to consider is the potential impact of Donald Trump’s victory in the forthcoming US presidential election on November 5.

Many have speculated that a Trump administration would maintain the status quo in terms of US policy toward Bangladesh. However, this assumption overlooks key aspects of Trump’s nationalist agenda.

Trump is fundamentally a nationalist, while the Democrats are seen as globalists. If Trump were to win, his focus would likely shift away from foreign engagements like the Ukraine conflict and the ongoing Israel-Palestine situation.

His administration would prioritize American interests, reducing foreign aid and military involvement abroad. This would leave countries like Bangladesh more vulnerable to regional powers such as India.

In this scenario, India could significantly increase its influence over Bangladesh, with or without the tacit support of the United States. This would serve Washington’s strategic interest in containing China’s growing influence in South Asia, even if it means sacrificing some democratic ideals in the process.

India created Bangladesh in 1971 and it can again intervene to protect its national interest if required.No one can stop this. Though a Trump victory could be of help in the Indian dominance over Bangladesh’s political and economic spheres, which could have profound implications for the region’s balance of power.

It would also result in unbearable pressure on the Yunus government both from New Delhi and Washington.The revelations in vernacular magazine JonotarChokh regarding Sheikh Hasina’s forced departure and the subsequent political manoeuvring in Bangladesh raise serious concerns about the future of the Yunus administration and the country.

The rise of Islamist forces within the interim government, the erosion of democratic institutions, and the growing influence of India all point to a potentially unstable future for Bangladesh.

With global shifts in power, particularly a possible Trump victory in the US, the geopolitical landscape of South Asia could become even more volatile, leaving Bangladesh caught in the crossfire of larger regional and international ambitions.

Meanwhile, political uncertainty and rise of religious extremism in Bangladesh shall greatly discourage foreign investment and at the same time, it may severely harm the country’s major source of export earnings – readymade garment industries – thus ultimately creating an unbearable challenge to the country’s economy.