All things considered, Mr. Rahman receives a “meets expectations” grade. The BNP government, as a team, receives a “needs improvement” grade, but not a failing one.
Bangladesh’s government faces a delicate balancing act. Every move in the international arena will be closely scrutinized for signs that the government is “tilting” towards one geopolitical axis or another.
At a time when investor confidence is closely tied to perceptions of policy stability and transparency, a structured and inclusive engagement framework sends a powerful signal. It tells both domestic and international investors that policymaking is consultative, predictable, and responsive.
A government that reduces VIP protocol but continues to evict vendors without rehabilitation has merely exchanged one performance for another.
You have to heal those it hurt, reassure those who hurt on its behalf, and do all of this under the watchful eye of a public that has very little forgiveness left in the tank. You are blamed for problems you inherited and applauded cautiously for small, unsexy fixes that don’t photograph well.
Sometimes the most revealing view of a country is not from above, but from within the flow of its everyday life
That the stability and sustainability of Bangladesh’s renewed tryst with democracy will depend on how maturely Tarique Rahman deals with the thorny issue of Sheikh Hasina and the Awami League.
Reviving Saarc is a Sisyphean task, but it is one Bangladesh is uniquely positioned to undertake. In a world of hardening blocs, South Asia cannot afford to be the only region without a voice.
Bangladesh is a small fish in a big pond. Mr. Rahman must show enough courage to defend the country’s sovereignty while recognizing Bangladesh’s limits and acting rationally as a national statesman: That requires him not to design foreign policy based on whatever the prevalent mood is on social media.
Political criticism will persist, that is the nature of democracy. But a government that governs through law, accountability, and judicial independence will find that criticism becomes manageable, trust becomes durable, and stability becomes achievable.
A two-thirds parliamentary majority means nothing if the streets of Dhaka turn against you, as Sheikh Hasina learned. If Tarique governs with the same composure and restraint he has shown since his return, there is reason for hope. If he does not, the verdict of the streets will be swift.
Your service to the nation can only continue if your well-being is safeguarded. Ultimately, the responsibility also rests with the state’s security apparatus, particularly those entrusted with your protection. When credible threats are perceived, it becomes their duty to act decisively.
Tarique Rahman can do what Sheikh Hasina would not: trust the Parliament he leads. Let it examine the Yunus era, line by line. Keep what works. Amend what can be saved. In that sequence, through that process, a course will emerge.
Bangladesh needs leaders willing to say what I believe must be said: Crimes against humanity warrant organizational accountability, but only through a judicial process that respects rule of law. That is the stance Tarique must take.
After liberation in 1971, the decisions made in those first years shaped the country for decades. The people who rise to state power or prominence in the next few years will define Bangladesh's trajectory for a generation.
Tarique Rahman’s return is undeniably historic. But history alone does not guarantee success. The comparison with 1972 is not about personalities -- it is about the structural burden placed on returning leaders in moments of national uncertainty.
