The crisis that has unfolded in Bangladesh this month represents an unprecedented challenge to Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina's authoritarian rule. The turmoil began when university students took to the streets to protest against the quota system in government jobs. 

These demonstrations quickly escalated, leading to violent clashes between the protesters and both the police and the ruling party's student organization. The situation intensified to the point where demonstrators gained control of Dhaka's streets and even launched an attack on the state broadcaster BTV (Bangladesh Television). As the unrest spread, it engulfed nearly half of the country's 64 districts, signaling a widespread discontent that the government could no longer ignore.
In response to this rapidly deteriorating situation, the government took drastic measures. They deployed armed forces and imposed a nationwide curfew, accompanied by shoot-on-sight orders, beginning on July 20. This heavy-handed approach was further compounded by the government's decision to shut down internet services across the country. This digital blackout, which lasted until partial restoration on July 23, effectively isolated Bangladesh's 171 million people from the global community and severely restricted the flow of information both within the country and to the outside world.
By the time internet services were partially restored, the government's harsh measures had largely succeeded in quelling the protests in Dhaka. The capital, once ablaze with demonstrations, fell into an uneasy calm. Under the strict curfew, citizens were permitted to leave their homes for only two hours daily to attend to essential tasks. Despite this semblance of control, the human cost of the crackdown has been severe. In the days following the outbreak of protests, reports suggest that nearly 200 protesters and their supporters have been killed, with the actual number potentially being much higher. Thousands more have been injured in the clashes. These figures, however, remain contentious, as Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina's government seems reluctant to acknowledge the full extent of the casualties.
This crisis represents the most significant test of Sheikh Hasina's leadership in her 15 years of uninterrupted rule. The government's response has been uncompromising, with authorities charging at least 61,000 people for their alleged involvement in the recent violence. Many of those charged are members of opposition parties, groups that Sheikh Hasina has consistently blamed for any unrest or problems in the country. This pattern of attributing all issues to opposition forces has been a hallmark of her governance style.
Even as the crackdown on protests threatens to have severe repercussions on the country's economy, the Prime Minister has remained steadfast in her approach. She has called for harsh retribution against those she terms 'criminals' involved in the protests. This vengeful and uncompromising response to the crisis has not only exacerbated tensions but has also fostered misconceptions and deepened divisions among the public.
The root of the students' grievance can be traced back to June when the High Court issued an order for the government to reinstate a long-standing quota system. This system reserved 30% of government jobs for family members of freedom fighters who fought in Bangladesh's bloody war of independence against Pakistan in 1971. To understand the significance of this, one must consider the deep-rooted connection between the ruling Awami League (AL) and the independence movement. Sheikh Hasina, being the daughter of Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, who led the independence movement and was the leader of the newly formed nation until his assassination in 1975, has consistently leveraged this historical legacy throughout her political career.
The quota system, therefore, was widely perceived as a mechanism designed to benefit Awami League members and their families. This perception is particularly problematic in a country where unemployment is a critical issue, with two-fifths of young Bangladeshis regularly finding themselves without work. In this context, the quota system struck a raw nerve among the youth, who saw it as an unfair advantage in an already challenging job market. The scale of the problem becomes clear when one considers that approximately 400,000 graduates compete annually for a mere 3,000 government jobs in an uncertain and highly competitive job market.
In a rare concession, the government did take one positive step by hastily asking the country's Supreme Court to overturn the lower court's ruling on the quota system. On July 21, the Supreme Court reduced the quota from 30% to 7%. However, this reduction did little to address the underlying frustrations of the students and young job seekers. Their grievances extend far beyond the quota system itself. For many educated young Bangladeshis, there is a pervasive belief that almost every job opportunity, from primary school teacher positions to roles in the police force to management trainee openings in various sectors, is controlled or influenced by the Awami League. This perception of a system rigged in favor of party loyalists has fueled deep-seated resentment among the youth.
Adding to this complex situation is the role played by the Awami League's student wing, the Bangladesh Chhatra League. This organization has come to be viewed by many as a personal militia operating on university campuses and in the streets. Their influence extends far beyond typical student politics, controlling everything from campus political activities to the allocation of dormitory rooms for graduates. The power and impunity with which the Chhatra League operates have led many to call for the organization to be disbanded. However, given its integral role in maintaining the Awami League's grip on power, particularly among the youth, such a dissolution seems highly unlikely.
Despite the severity of the current crisis, there appears to be little likelihood of serious questions being raised about the durability of Sheikh Hasina's rule, at least in the short term. Over the past 15 years, her government has overseen significant infrastructural improvements in Bangladesh, a fact that her supporters often point to as evidence of her effective leadership. However, these developments have come at a cost. Throughout her tenure, Sheikh Hasina has faced numerous accusations of election rigging, undermining state institutions, and presiding over widespread corruption among the Awami League and its business allies.
The Prime Minister's response to criticism has become increasingly defensive and combative. Her typical reaction to those who dare to criticize her rule is to accuse them of being 'Razakars' – a highly charged term referring to collaborators with the Pakistani army during the 1971 war of independence. This knee-jerk response to criticism indicates how far removed the 76-year-old Prime Minister has become from the realities and concerns of modern Bangladesh, particularly its youth.
Even among her allies, there is growing unease about her leadership style and decision-making. Privately, some admit that she is making mistakes in her handling of the current crisis and in her overall governance. However, the culture of fear and sycophancy that has developed around her means that no minister dares to speak up or offer contrary opinions to her face. This lack of honest feedback and constructive criticism within her inner circle has contributed to a situation where the ruling party's decay is becoming increasingly apparent, as pungent and unavoidable as the tear gas used to disperse protesters.
For now, the Awami League is likely to maintain its grip on power, even as reports of government-related violence continue to increase. However, the long-term consequences of this crisis and the government's response to it could prove disastrous for both the Awami League and Sheikh Hasina personally. An insider within the party has noted that as long as the AL remains in power under its current leadership, a large portion of the younger generation feels alienated and has refrained from fully engaging in the country's development and governance.
This generational disconnect, coupled with the government's authoritarian tendencies and inability to address the core concerns of the youth, poses a significant threat to Bangladesh's future stability and development. While the immediate crisis may be contained through force, the underlying issues of unemployment, political exclusion, and systemic corruption remain unaddressed. Unless Sheikh Hasina and the Awami League can find a way to genuinely engage with the concerns of the younger generation and implement meaningful reforms, they risk further eroding their legitimacy and potentially setting the stage for more severe unrest in the future.