In her most explosive and revealing interview since being forced from power, former Bangladesh Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina has broken her silence from her secret shelter in New Delhi, launching a searing attack on the Muhammad Yunus-led interim regime and warning that Bangladesh is sliding into authoritarian rule and extremist influence with an alignment with terror groups. Speaking to NDTV’s Aditya Raj Kaul, Hasina recounts the chaos of her August 5 ouster, the destruction of her family’s historic home, and what she describes as a state-sanctioned assault on minorities and democracy. From exile in India, she lays out her battle for political legitimacy and her vision for Bangladesh’s return to democratic stability.
Since leaving Bangladesh, you’ve rarely spoken to the international media, addressing mostly your supporters and party members. How do you personally reflect on your violent ouster on August 5, 2024? Could you take us through how those events unfolded from your perspective?
The events of last summer were a tragic subversion of democracy. What started as legitimate student protests was exploited by anti-democratic forces who conspired to remove the elected government through violence and intimidation, leading to chaos and needless loss of life. Very quickly, it became apparent that the security situation had deteriorated so drastically that my only choice was to leave Dhaka to ensure the safety of my family and to prevent the escalation of violence.
It was painful to leave behind my homeland. It has also been difficult to watch as our pluralistic culture was assaulted, and the measures we had taken to nurture economic development were senselessly reversed. But I have great faith in the Bangladeshi people’s resilience and desire for democratic choice.
What was your reaction when mobs – reportedly acting with state sanction – destroyed 32 Dhanmondi, the residence of your father, the Father of the Nation Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, and the last remaining symbols of his legacy? How do you believe the people of Bangladesh should preserve and honour his memory in this new political era?
The destruction of my father’s historic residence was a barbaric attempt to erase the legacy of our hard-fought battle for independence from Bangladesh’s history. Those in power want to eradicate the spirit of our Liberation War. This is an absolute insult to the memories of those who gave their lives for our future. But I have faith that the people of Bangladesh will never allow their legacy to be forgotten. This legacy lies not in places or physical objects, but in the values they embodied: democracy, equality, secularism, and economic emancipation. These cannot be extinguished from Bangladesh’s soul.
Given the current political configuration in Dhaka – with the ruling establishment appearing firmly in control and the opposition largely subdued – what, in your view, explains the prolonged delay in announcing elections? Is this paralysis, fear of losing power, or deliberate consolidation? And under such circumstances, do you believe there is any realistic space for a genuinely fair electoral process in the near future after the recent announcement on elections and referendum?
This is an illegitimate government that has deliberately delayed elections out of fear of facing voters’ judgment. I am deeply skeptical that the elections slated for February, if they happen, will be anything more than a charade, confected to rubber-stamp the regime’s unconstitutional rule. The ban on the Awami League sets a dangerous and concerning precedent for our country – one that has disenfranchised tens of millions of ordinary citizens in the process. The unelected Yunus regime has already drafted an unconstitutional charter and proposed a raft of reforms, all of which serve no purpose other than to legitimise authoritarian rule. Any new government elected through this sham process cannot be considered democratic.
Also Read: “Will Probably Sentence Her To Death”: Sheikh Hasina’s Son Ahead Of Verdict
Reports indicate a disturbing pattern of attacks on Hindu and other minority communities – with temples vandalised, homes looted, and forced displacements. From what you hear from your networks, how widespread is this violence? Do you see it as politically motivated rather than purely communal? And do you think the international community is overlooking it for geopolitical convenience?
I am deeply distressed by the waves of systematic violence that have targeted religious minorities since Yunus seized power. To this day, thousands of individuals, homes, businesses, and places of worship have been attacked, and many have been forced to flee. The state has not only failed to protect them; it has actively sanctioned these brutal attacks by denying their very existence.
During my 15 years in office, we worked hard to contain radical and extremist forces and to uphold the secular values of our constitution. For years, Bangladesh was a beacon of religious tolerance in our region. Yunus made it clear that there would be no place for religious pluralism in our country when he staffed his cabinet with extremists and released convicted criminals with known links to terror organisations such as Hizb-ut Tahrir. There is no doubt in my mind that these are politically and religiously motivated attacks.
I was grateful for the support of my international peers in condemning this violence in the immediate aftermath of last summer’s protests, but I fear this initial outrage has fallen quiet. Equal rights and the safety of all citizens are non-negotiable.
A prevailing theory suggests that the United States may have influenced Bangladesh’s political transition or even nudged regime change. Do you believe that has substance, or is it exaggerated? How do you interpret Washington’s real motives amid the strategic competition between the US, India, and China? Have any American officials or lawmakers communicated with you since your departure that shaped your perception of their role?
I have seen no decisive evidence to suggest that foreign powers had any influence on the events of last summer. I do know that many people in American political circles admired Yunus for his economic achievements and erroneously equated these with political prowess. Now that they have seen him place radical extremists in his cabinet, dismantle Bangladesh’s democratic infrastructure, and discriminate against minorities, I imagine he is no longer so popular amongst Western liberals.
A stable, democratic Bangladesh benefits us all. I believe that any country that values democracy will support us in our fight to restore our democratic values.
Your current presence in India – and recent remarks by Muhammad Yunus suggesting that New Delhi might continue to host you – have drawn attention. How would you describe your relationship with India today: refuge, ally, or strategic partner? And how do you view India’s role in both your personal circumstances and Bangladesh’s political future?
I am deeply grateful to the people of India for welcoming me and providing me with a temporary refuge. Our countries share 4,000 kilometres of border, deep family and cultural ties, and critical security interests.
Our partnership rests on a deep respect and understanding of each other’s sovereignty. Bangladesh’s future must be determined independently by its own people and leaders. I believe India understands this and would prefer to deal with a mature and authoritative partner in Dhaka, governing with the genuine consent of the people.
Given Bangladesh’s strategic location between India and China, and amid global power rivalries, do you see your country’s destiny – and your own political future – being shaped as much by external geopolitics as by internal reform? How do you plan to balance these forces if you return to leadership?
Bangladesh has always been a friend to all. During our 15 years in office, we worked hard to establish our identity as a reliable diplomatic and economic partner. Our people want prosperity, not confrontation. This is why I always made sure our diplomacy served our economic and strategic interests for the long term.
That is how you craft a successful foreign policy – by identifying our long-term interests, finding areas of common interest with other countries, and working patiently with them to advance or protect those interests. Yunus’ diplomacy, in contrast, is skittish and inconsistent, and seemingly driven by a desire to collect endorsements from fair-weather friends whom he hopes will legitimise his unelected administration. Ironically, he seems to have made more enemies and friends in the process. Neither the British prime minister nor the French president would meet him when he visited their countries earlier this year. The American president has spoken publicly of his dislike for Yunus. And then, of course, there is the disaster of his falling out with New Delhi.
Since your ouster, Pakistan and Bangladesh have reportedly strengthened diplomatic and military ties. Do you worry that this new alignment could embolden radical or extremist groups within Bangladesh and risk turning it into a safe haven for terror elements once again?
We have always pursued constructive relations with Pakistan, cautiously and with the priorities of Bangladesh in mind. Yunus has shown that he would rather recklessly pursue potentially hazardous entanglements for short-term diplomatic clout than wait for an elected and experienced leader to guide these relations.
The current administration’s alignment with radical factions and known terror organisations is deeply worrying. For decades, our government was successful in containing overseas and domestic terror elements that threatened our secular identity and regional stability. Instead, Yunus has elevated these extremists into positions of power and created the conditions for these factions to flourish.