What this latest interview has shown is that even 18 months after the uprising that unseated them from power, the party has not changed one iota. The party remains exactly as it was prior to August 5, 2024, save for the fact that it is no longer in power.
Where does the Awami League stand today, 18 months after the July Uprising, and is there any way back for the party post-February 12?
Why “Bangladesh First” Is Coherent Politics and “We Are the People” Is a Theological Trap for Jamaat. The first is a moral ordering principle which prioritizes responsibility. The second is a sovereignty claim and defines power.
In complete idiocy, that nation, while it prepares to scan the citizens’ history and moral character, in order to judge their citizens eligibility criterion, they forgot that the digital space has records of all they once were, all they currently are and all that they will become in the near future
Turning water into a nationalist symbol may mobilize sentiment, but it has never produced water -- and it has often delayed the reordering of ties that scarcity now makes unavoidable.
Platforms expand opportunities while simultaneously consolidating economic power. Those who control digital infrastructure and data ecosystems enjoy disproportionate gains, while workers and small entrepreneurs absorb most of the risks.
There was never a provision in the law that the permission of the first wife is needed for a second marriage; therefore, the court did not say anything new.
Whether it is a party that markets itself as the sole heir of 1971, or a hardline movement that once mocked that struggle and now sanitizes its record, the exploitation is the same. Both seek to convert freedom into political capital. Both demand that citizens forget what they saw and felt. Both ask us to trade memory for myth.
Bangladesh’s second marriage law hasn’t changed. What has changed is the way people have been talking about it. Social media has turned a technical legal issue into a viral topic without context.
The most enduring line of her address may be her insistence that empowerment must reach homes, institutions, and mindsets simultaneously. This is not a comfortable demand. It implicates everyone.
What if Bangladesh's problem isn't the divides themselves? Secular versus religious. Bengali versus Muslim. Shahbag versus Shapla. Aspiration versus stagnation. What if the real problem is our inability to tolerate disagreement at all?
Is tinkering with the formal rules of the game the triumph of hope over experience (this time politics will be different)? Or a more technocratic faith in the power of institutional architecture to push back against the potent political imperatives of rents and control (we can design our way to democracy)? Either way, fixing the rules seems a misplaced focus when history has shown that the amassing of political power rapidly renders such niceties ornamental.
This is not peace. And it is not war. It is the controlled demolition of the Sykes-Picot agreement in favour of an integrated Middle East. Iran is reshaping its internal power structure and regional posture. The Middle East is not descending into chaos. It is being reorganized.
A yes vote is only the beginning, not the end. The real work of implementation of the reform agenda is what matters. Similarly, we should not interpret a no vote to suggest that the voters are against reform or that the reform agenda dies there.
Whatever path you ultimately choose, I offer you my sincere best wishes. May your journey ahead be guided by wisdom, courage, and purpose -- and may it be as smooth and fulfilling as destiny permits.
