On Monday (February 10), a group of protesters descended on Sabyasachi Publication’s stall at the Amar Ekushey Book Fair in Dhaka, enraged by the display of a book by Taslima Nasrin, an exiled Bangladeshi writer currently residing in India.
Videos of the incident quickly spread across social media, showing the agitated crowd demanding that a writer present at the stall “hold his ears”. The individual in question was later identified as Shatabdi Vobo.
The footage, a chaotic blend of voices and actions, showed Vobo appearing to slap someone in response to mounting physical threats. Meanwhile, a few men in traditional Punjabi attire and beards attempted to shield him.
According to the Dhaka Tribune, police intervened, escorting the writer out of the fair while Vobo was forced to publicly apologise. The stall was temporarily shuttered in the aftermath.
The incident quickly sparked an outpouring of media criticism and left the interim government in a precarious position. Since the fall of Sheikh Hasina on August 5, following a massive student-led uprising, protests have become a daily fixture.
While the interim government has largely managed to defuse these protests non-violently, many critics liken the current climate to a shaken soda bottle. After years of simmering discontent under Hasina’s regime – marked by a stifling of free expression – the lid was finally popped, and the pent-up frustrations are now spilling out in full force.
Among the most aggrieved groups during Hasina’s tenure were the country’s alem-ulamas – religious scholars and Islam-oriented outfits. In an attempt to placate Western and Indian concerns over Bangladesh’s potential drift toward religious extremism, Hasina ruthlessly suppressed these groups, even allegedly orchestrating false-flag operations to justify brutal crackdowns.
Given this backdrop, the simmering resentment from these once-vocal factions – against both the secular liberal urban elite and the regime that suppressed them – comes as no surprise.
The protests may seem sudden, but they are the result of years of repression, with the current wave reflecting the deep-seated anger that had been long silenced.
Also read: India’s ‘Sheikh Hasina Problem’ is Not Going Away Easily
The secular struggle in Bangladesh
In Bangladesh, the leftist secular society, though representing a small fraction of the population, has long been a strong supporter of the Awami League and its politics.
This alignment is understandable, given the Awami League’s centre-left identity and its historical roots in the more progressive wing of the Muslim League, which split off to form a party focused on a forward-looking vision for the country.
The Liberation War of 1971 further solidified the secular, left-leaning identity of the Awami League. As Pakistan, using Islam as a unifying force between East and West Pakistan, carried out atrocities such as the genocide of March 25, 1971, the East’s push for independence gained momentum.
After liberation, secularism remained a dominant force among the cultural elite, even during the turbulent years following the assassination of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, the reign of nationalist Ziaur Rahman and the military rule of Hussain Muhammad Ershad, who controversially declared Islam the state religion.
Despite these political shifts, the cultural majority continued to support the Awami League’s vision of Bengali secularism, which helped shape the dominant urban narrative of progress in the country.
However, the issue began to grow as a significant portion of the Muslim-majority population began to feel alienated by this secular narrative, which over time became more of a pseudo-secularism – one that seemed to foster disdain for Islamism rather than promote true secular values.
As the mainstream media and intellectual elite increasingly viewed Islamic identity and practices as backward – and even as a potential threat to societal security – resentment began to grow among the more religiously inclined segments of the population.
This alienation, coupled with the harsh rule of Hasina, exacerbated the discontent.
The July-August uprising, which many have described as a watershed moment for all previously suppressed groups to voice their anger, has brought the rise of Islamist groups to the forefront.
While these groups’ ‘unnecessary interventions’ – such as morally policing book stalls and chanting Islamist slogans in places where they need not – may seem overwhelming to some, particularly in neighbouring India, where successive administrations have tended to back Hasina’s government rather than the will of the Bangladeshi people, this rise in ultra-right-wing activity is often misinterpreted as an Islamist surge.
This is despite the fact that the interim administration, currently led by a secular group of elites, has not embraced this shift.
Western powers, including the US and the EU, have expressed concerns, often through the lens of India’s narrative on Bangladesh.
These external reactions risk misjudging the real dynamics at play in the country: a growing divide between the secular elite and the religiously conservative masses.
Rising concerns over mob justice
The concerns raised by external powers about the increasing presence of Islamist groups in Bangladesh are neither exaggerated nor unfounded.
Inside the country, even the middle class and urban populations have started to express unease over incidents like the recent mob action against the publisher. From an optics standpoint, such events provide little room for the Yunus administration to manoeuvre, leaving it vulnerable to criticism.
This particular incident surrounding the book fair has acted as the ‘straw that broke the camel’s back’ for the interim government, patience-wise.
Mahfuj Alam, a key adviser to the administration, posted a stern warning on his verified Facebook page, addressing the “Islamist groups” and urging them to act responsibly – or face severe consequences.
The chief adviser’s office also issued a statement condemning the violence: “The attack shows contempt for both the rights of Bangladeshi citizens and for the laws of our country.”
The statement went on to emphasise that such violence undermines the open-minded spirit of Bangladesh’s cultural heritage, specifically the 1952 Language Movement, which commemorates the martyrs who died defending their mother tongue.
Despite its perceived declining mandate – after initially receiving strong public support – the interim government has rightly condemned the mindless moral policing by Islamist groups, warning that such actions could turn Bangladesh into a geopolitical flashpoint.
It’s undeniable that Hasina’s regime brutally suppressed the ultra-right wing which, though largely harmless and inclined toward ritualistic religious practices, now feels emboldened since the August 5 uprising to voice its grievances.
However, this newfound freedom doesn’t justify the creation of mobs that attempt to dictate the terms of civilian rights, especially in a country with a functioning government.
The interim administration, walking on eggshells, is acutely aware of the delicate balance it must maintain. The last thing it wants is to be seen as a government whose mandate can be undermined by angry mobs.
Faisal Mahmud is the Minister (Press) of the Bangladesh High Commission in New Delhi.
