A recent report by the Gatestone Institute written by Uzay Bulut has raised serious concerns over religious violence and the rise of Islamist extremism in Bangladesh. The report claims that more than 2,200 incidents of violence against Hindus occurred in Bangladesh in 2024, citing an official Indian government response, and further claims that radical Islamic groups, including Hizb ut-Tahrir, are operating freely under the protection of Bangladesh’s interim government led by Prof. Dr. Muhammad Yunus. 

However, these claims are inconsistent with data from local authorities and independent human rights organizations. Below is a comprehensive fact-check addressing the accuracy of these allegations.

Claim 1: 2,200 Violent Incidents Against Hindus in 2024

The Gatestone Institute report claims that more than 2,200 cases of violence against Hindus were recorded in Bangladesh in 2024. This figure was cited by Indian government officials, including Minister of State for External Affairs Kirti Vardhan Singh, who allegedly referenced data from minority and human rights organizations.

Fact-Check

The claim that 2,200 incidents of violence occurred against Hindus in 2024 has been widely contested by Bangladeshi authorities and independent human rights organizations. The Chief Adviser's press wing in Bangladesh has described this figure as “misleading and highly exaggerated.”

According to data provided by the Bangladesh Ministry of Home Affairs and the Bangladesh Police, between August 5 and October 22, 2024, only 88 cases were registered related to attacks on religious minorities, specifically targeting Hindus, with 70 individuals arrested in connection with these incidents.

Furthermore, independent human rights group Ain O Salish Kendra (ASK) reported that from January to November 2024, a total of 138 violent incidents against religious minorities were recorded, resulting in the injury of 82 individuals and attacks on 368 houses (Ain O Salish Kendra, 2024). These figures are in stark contrast to the 2,200 incidents claimed by the Gatestone Institute.

For comparison, the Bangladesh Hindu-Buddhist-Christian Unity Council, an advocacy group, also maintains that religious violence against Hindus is much lower than the numbers quoted by Gatestone.

The council's own documentation and reports, based on police records and local media, highlight that many of the incidents of violence reported in Bangladesh were either mischaracterized or not religiously motivated.

For instance, in Dhaka, the murder of a staff member at Notre Dame College was widely reported in local news outlets. According to Prothom Alo, the murder occurred during a burglary when the victim, Lipika Gomes, was fatally struck with a hammer after waking up to find thieves in her home. Local authorities have confirmed that this incident was not religiously motivated but rather a crime of opportunity related to theft (New Age, September 10, 2024).

Similarly, In Chattogram, a death was linked to a property dispute rather than religious violence. According to local media reports from Prothom Alo, an altercation between two individuals escalated into violence, leading to the death of a person. The case was categorized by local police as a personal conflict over property and not related to any religious animosity (Prothom Alo, September 22, 2024).

In Gaibandha, another incident that was cited in the report was tied to a business dispute. Kalbela reported that the murder of Sabita Rani was a result of an argument between two individuals involved in a poultry farm business. Authorities concluded that there was no religious element to the case, and it was categorized as a business-related conflict (Dhaka Tribune, September 25, 2024).

These incidents highlight how many of the so-called cases of religious violence were rooted in personal, societal, or economic conflicts, and not the result of sectarian violence. 

Claim 2: Radical Islamic Groups Operating Freely Under the Interim Government

The Gatestone report further claims that radical Islamic groups, such as Hizb ut-Tahrir, are operating with impunity under the protection of Bangladesh's interim government, which allegedly has allowed these groups to spread terror and gain traction in the country.

Fact-Check

This claim is not substantiated by the actions of the Bangladesh law enforcement agencies. In fact, the government of Bangladesh has been actively cracking down on Hizb ut-Tahrir, a banned extremist group. Following a rally organized by the group outside the Baitul Mukarram Mosque in Dhaka on October 5, 2024, Bangladesh Police initiated a nationwide operation against members of the group, resulting in the arrest of 36 individuals by March 8, 2025 (BDnews, March 2025). These arrests were made under the Anti-Terrorism Act 2009, which criminalizes activities related to banned extremist groups.

The Dhaka Metropolitan Police (DMP) emphasized that the police had acted strategically to disperse the rally without causing casualties. Police Commissioner SM Sazzat Ali explained that while they could have intervened earlier, the large crowd at the rally required careful handling to avoid harm to civilians. He also stated that there had been no intelligence failure regarding the presence of Hizb ut-Tahrir operatives, highlighting that such groups were under active surveillance by Bangladesh's Counter-Terrorism and Transnational Crime Unit (CTTC) (Daily Star, March 9).

Additionally, the Bangladesh government has implemented measures to disrupt the activities of radical groups, including increased monitoring of public gatherings and online activities related to extremism. These actions contradict the claim in the Gatestone report that the interim government has allowed these groups to operate without oversight.

Claim 3: Bangladesh’s Economy in Free Fall

The Gatestone report asserts that Bangladesh’s economy is in freefall, with the rule of law under assault and the country’s financial system in disarray.

Fact-Check

Contrary to the Gatestone Institute’s portrayal, Bangladesh's economy is not in a state of collapse. While the country faced significant challenges, particularly during the pandemic, several indicators suggest recovery and growth.

In February 2024, the Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics (BBS) reported that inflation had decreased to 9.32%, the lowest it had been in 22 months, and exports had risen by 16% in the same month compared to the previous year (Xinhua, February 5).

Moreover, Bangladesh’s foreign reserves saw a significant boost due to remittance inflows. In February 2024, Bangladesh recorded $2.5 billion in remittances from expatriates, marking an increase of 25% over the same period the previous year (Bangladesh Bank, February 2024). This growth in remittance is a crucial factor stabilizing the country’s foreign exchange reserves.

Prof. Dr. Muhammad Yunus, the Chief Adviser of the interim government, confirmed that the government had made strides in restoring discipline in the economy. He reported that the country had moved from a difficult economic situation to a recovery phase, with significant improvements in both banking confidence and fiscal discipline (Press Release from Chief Adviser’s Office, 2024).

Contrary to claims of a freefall, Bangladesh is now showing strong indicators of economic stabilization, which stands in sharp contrast to the Gatestone report’s assertions.

Claim 4: Legitimacy of the Interim Government

The Gatestone report raises questions about the legitimacy of the interim government of Prof. Dr. Yunus, implying that it lacks constitutional foundation and is undermining Bangladesh’s history.

Fact-Check

The formation of the interim government followed the resignation and departure of the former Prime Minister in August 2024 amid widespread mass protests. This extraordinary political shift, described by legal scholars as a revolutionary transition, aligns with Hans Kelsen’s Grundnorm theory, which holds that a new legal order can emerge from a successful revolution reflecting the will of the people (Cambridge Law Journal).

🔹 Constitutional Context

While Bangladesh’s Constitution (Article 57.3) allows a Prime Minister to remain in office until a successor is appointed, that clause became moot as the former PM was no longer present in the country, rendering the office vacant in practice.

In response, the President of Bangladesh, under constitutional authority, appointed the interim government on August 8, 2024 (The Daily Star). This move was reportedly guided by consultations with political parties, civil society, student movement leaders, and advisory input from the judiciary (The Daily Star – A New Dawn in Bangladesh).

🔹 Effective Control and International Recognition

In international law, a government gains legitimacy both through de jure authority (legal recognition) and de facto control (actual governance). The Yunus-led government satisfies both:

• Effective control of state institutions, including law enforcement and civil service.
• Popular support, as seen in mass mobilizations across Bangladesh.
• International recognition, including statements from the United Nations (UN Press Release, Aug 2024) and European Union (EU External Action, Aug 2024) expressing support for the transitional government and upcoming elections.

Background on Gatestone Institute and Contributor Uzay Bulut

The Gatestone Institute is a New York-based think tank founded in 2012 by political activist and philanthropist Nina Rosenwald, known for funding pro-Israel and anti-Islam causes. According to a report by the Center for American Progress, Rosenwald’s foundation donated over $2.8 million between 2001 and 2011 to groups accused of promoting Islamophobia.

Gatestone’s former chairman, John Bolton, was paid at least $310,000 before serving as U.S. National Security Advisor under Donald Trump. The institute also received at least $250,000 in donations from the Mercer Family Foundation between 2014 and 2016, linking it to prominent conservative funding networks.

The institute has been widely criticized for promoting misleading and alarmist narratives—particularly about Muslims and immigrants. For example, Gatestone repeatedly spread the debunked claim that “no-go zones” existed in European cities where non-Muslims and police were unwelcome. This was discredited by Snopes and other fact-checkers. A 2018 NBC News investigation found that Gatestone had published multiple “false anti-Muslim accounts,” including stories exaggerating crime by migrants and falsely claiming German authorities were confiscating homes to house refugees.

Watchdog organizations, such as the Bridge Initiative at Georgetown University, have documented Gatestone’s role in amplifying anti-Muslim sentiment under the guise of security policy. Despite these criticisms, Gatestone maintains that it critiques radical Islam, not Islam as a religion.

Uzay Bulut, author of the Gatestone article on Bangladesh, is a Turkish-born journalist affiliated with platforms such as the Middle East Forum and the Philos Project. Her reporting frequently focuses on minority persecution in Muslim-majority countries. While some of her work highlights underreported human rights issues, she has faced criticism for selectively interpreting history and using ideologically driven sources.

In a 2017 rebuttal published by The Armenian Weekly, Bulut was accused of “essentializing” Islamic history and quoting genocide scholars out of context to portray Islam as inherently violent. The critique also noted her reliance on figures like Andrew G. Bostom, considered a fringe anti-Muslim voice, without proper scholarly framing.

In summary, the Gatestone Institute and its contributor Uzay Bulut have both been subjects of controversy for their ideological framing, selective sourcing, and exaggerated narratives—particularly on issues involving Islam, immigration, and global religious tensions. These patterns warrant close scrutiny when evaluating claims made in their reports.

Conclusion

The claims made by the Gatestone Institute regarding religious violence, extremist activities, and Bangladesh’s economic and political decline are not supported by verified data and are highly misleading. Local authorities and human rights organizations provide a far more nuanced picture, showing that the scale of religious violence is significantly lower than reported, that the government is actively combating extremist activities, and that Bangladesh’s economy is on a path to recovery. Additionally, the interim government’s legitimacy and goals align with constitutional provisions, and no credible evidence suggests that it is undermining the country's history or values.

As always, it is essential to rely on credible, local sources and verified data to gain a clear understanding of the complex situation in Bangladesh.