Nepal Won't Go Bangladesh's Way

With the ouster of Bangladesh Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina Wazed, social media platforms and media opinion pages in Nepal are awash with comments and articles implying that the same scenario may occur in our country, given the actions and performances of our leaders in authority.

An angry and large student protest that erupted in Bangladesh forced Prime Minister Hasina to quit and fly to India aboard an army helicopter. The students requested that the government abolish reservations, or the quota system, which would favour the children of the participants of the 1971 Liberation War in lucrative government positions. They asked that all students and talented Bangladeshis have access to these jobs. Later, the Supreme Court overturned the quota system clause, but the students refused to back down, citing the deaths of numerous protesting students in police action during the nationwide demonstration, resulting in Hasina’s and her government’s resignations.

Other forces

However, student demonstrations in this South Asian country could not have taken such intensity without involving other forces. The Bangladesh Anti-Discriminatory Student Movement organised the student demonstrations, but, observers believe, they were further fuelled by the opposition parties, the Bangladesh Nationalist Party and the pro-Islamic Jamat-e-Islam, leading to the fall of the PM Hasina administration. Many think that the student demonstration would not have reached such heights if the BNP and pro-Islamist parties had not taken part, accusing the pro-minority and pro-India Hasina government of becoming autocratic over its 15-year tenure.

Once she left, the formation of an interim government took place, with Nobel Laureate Muhammad Yunus assuming the role of advisor to the interim cabinet. However, attacks on Hindus and Buddhists have continued, forcing minority Hindus to hold protest rallies in Dhaka, asking that the new government should provide safety to them.

The dramatic collapse of the Hasina government follows similar events in Sri Lanka in July 2022, when President Gotabaya Rajapakshe and his brother Prime Minister Mahinda Rajapakshe, along with many members of his government, fled the country following a protest after the economy collapsed. Previously, President Mohammad Ashraf Ghani departed Afghanistan after his government fell because of the United States’ decision to withdraw from the country following an agreement with Taliban fighters who captured the capital Kabul in August 2021. The Maldives, too, is experiencing political troubles lately.

These instances have prompted many Nepalis to draw a parallel, asserting that such incidents could also happen here and that politicians in top positions may be compelled to flee the country, similar to Bangladesh Prime Minister Hasina. A close analysis of the situation in Nepal does not provide us with any indication that a comparable occurrence to that which took place in Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, might occur in Nepal, a country of 29 million people, in the foreseeable future. Because no one has ever forced Nepali leaders and prime ministers into exile. Former King Gyanendra, despite being overthrown in a 2006 uprising, finds happiness and peace in residing here.

Meanwhile, Bangladesh, home to 172 million people and one of the world’s densest populations, has a lengthy history of deadly political upheavals and vendettas. Its two most prominent political figures, Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujib-Ur-Rahaman and army chief-turned politician Zia-Ur-Rahaman, perished in political coups. The political competition in this country is intense and often escalates to an intense and dangerous level. Since Sheikh Hasina and her Awami League took office, opposition leader Khaleda Zia suffered government ire and vice versa.

A strong culture of political vendetta and putting opposing leaders behind jail is common here. Zia, Hasina, the head of Jamat-e-Islam, and other leaders were put behind bars in different periods, demonstrating politics is quite challenging in Bangladesh. Rivals accused Sheikha Hasina of becoming an authoritarian throughout her lengthy stint in power, which is not true of our leaders. For many years, our three leaders — Nepali Congress president Sher Bahadur Deuba, UML chair KP Sharma Oli, and CPN-Maoist Centre chair Pushpa Kamal Dahal Prachanda — have shared a prime minister’s chair by either winning elections or forging alliances.

In Nepal, the culture of performing political vendettas is almost nonexistent. Since restoring democracy in the 1990s, competing political party leaders have imprisoned no major leaders. Despite dominating politics for decades, rivalries between communist and Nepali Congress officials have never escalated to a personal level. Meanwhile, religious fanaticism is virtually nonexistent in Nepal, as opposed to Bangladesh, where pro-Islamist parties are a significant force accused of engaging in religious militancy and attacking minority Hindus, Buddhists, and Christians. Many think that pro-Islamist parties were also behind Hasina’s removal from office because she took strong measures against Islamic extremism.

Pro-Hindu groups

Back home, examples revealed Nepal’s pro-Hindu groups lack teeth and are unable to organise strong protests against secularism. Since the country’s secularisation, top leaders and administrations have refrained from collaborating with Hindu organisations. Similarly, student demonstrations in Nepal will never be as intense or terrible as those in Bangladesh. A considerable number of our youth population, including students and economically productive, politically informed, and active young individuals, have gone overseas to work and study. Because they reside overseas, political parties lack the necessary youth power to carry out political activities. Senior party members, most of whom are an ageing lot, cannot take to the streets anytime they wish to protest strongly.

Meanwhile, the Nepali economy, particularly its foreign reserves, remains at a favourable level as the country continues to receive remittances from individuals who travelled overseas to work and earn. This further blunts the fears that Nepal may follow in the footsteps of Sri Lanka. In conclusion, despite facing challenges in maintaining the federal arrangement and addressing corruption allegations, our leaders in influential positions have not encountered the same obstacles and risks as PM Hasina. Despite making significant economic progress under PM Hasina’s leadership, Bangladesh has proven that it is still a volatile nation politically, with people taking to the streets at the slightest provocation, which is not the case with Nepal.

(Upadhyay is the former managing editor of this daily.)