The Great Betrayal: Why The Reforms Led By Dr. Yunus Turned Out Just A Mask For Authoritarian Rule? – OpEd

“All of us were only deceived’: wrote Umama Fatema, a key figure of Anti quota protest, on a public facebook post, ostensibly to expose the betrayal in past eleven months by leaders of Student Against Discrimination (SAD) platform that spearheaded the “meticulously” designed regime change in Bangladesh. Floated on July 8 last year, leaders of SAD were the first to propose name of Nobel Peace Prize Laureate Dr Muhammad Yunus as interim regime head. But Umama’s resignation from her role as SAD spokeswoman in this June laid bare the hypocrisy of the famed microcredit businessman and his cronies with the nation, belying the western media projection of a new dawn in Bangladesh with the rise of Yunus in power. 

On August 8 last year, when Yunus took charge, a euphoria gripped the nation: privileges and discrimination within the government machinery will end once and for all. Since the formation of SAD in July2024, the streets of Dhaka reverberated with the chants to make the future of Bangladesh free from state sponsored privileges. The call for “No quota, only merit” crafted by SAD served as the bedrock of the protest that culminated in violent overthrow of the Shiekh Hasina led regime. 

But eleven months down the line, the same faces took a complete U turn. Their commitment for ending privileges turned into a farce. Rather in post Sheikh Hasina period, these architects of the new regime have exceled themselves into infamous icons of abusing state power, championing fascism. 

This is not irony. It is strategy. At the heart of this quiet coup stands Yunus, the internationally lauded economist turned power broker. Though unelected, he now acts as the de facto Prime Minister, wielding executive authority without democratic legitimacy. His advisory council, formed in the name of reform, has become a fortress of unaccountable influence.

 The leaders who once decried quotas now enjoy their own version of it—granting themselves privileges, legal immunity, and institutional control. All of it masked in noble language: sacrifice, stability, and national progress.

But beneath that polished narrative lies the decay of democracy. The movement’s betrayal is not just political; it’s moral. When calls for equality morph into tools for personal elevation, when protest turns into power play, the public loses more than trust—it loses agency.

What began as a cry for reform has ended in a calculated seizure of power. The quota system may have been redesigned, but its essence—elitism and exclusion—remains intact, now cloaked in the respectability of a new ruling class.

The Myth of Meritocracy

Their slogan was equality, their demand was meritocracy, and their promise was an end to the patronage politics that had long plagued the system. But once the dust settled and power came within reach, the tune changed dramatically.

The same leaders who had decried quotas as undemocratic suddenly began creating a new and bloated system of privileges—this time, for themselves. 

Lets take a look at one of the most brazen example  

Three public hospitals were ‘held hostage’ and thousands of general patients were denied treatment as discharged July uprising injured keep occupying beds, according to media reports. The so-called July uprising victims reportedly clashed with doctors and staffers at The National Institute of Ophthalmology and Hospital, the country’s only specialised eye hospital, leading to a total shut down of health services. 

Similarly, under the guise of honouring the so-called “July martyrs,” they have carved out a new elite class. From monthly allowances to job reservations, university admissions to state-sponsored foreign medical treatment, benefits are now being funneled into the hands of those connected to the protest leadership.

To institutionalize this, a special Directorate has been formed to manage and distribute these perks, embedding them into the state machinery. What was once a populist call for fairness has morphed into a cynical exercise in power consolidation. The same people who scorned others for wanting “special treatment” are now the architects of a new hierarchy of entitlement.

On social media, independent experts commented that this isn’t merely hypocrisy—it’s a textbook example of state capture. The revolution has eaten its children and replaced them with a new class of privileged insiders. In the name of reform, they’ve simply reshuffled the seats of power without dismantling the system of exploitation. The rhetoric of equality was only a stepping stone. Now, those who marched against quotas have become the most enthusiastic champions of a system built entirely on them.

Dr. Yunus: From Laureate to Lawgiver

Yunus’s rise to power amid political turmoil was initially seen by many as a stabilizing move—an interim, technocratic fix to Bangladesh’s deepening political crisis. Appointed Chief Adviser without an electoral mandate, Yunus was expected to maintain neutrality and uphold constitutional norms. Instead, he has become the architect of an unprecedented political re-engineering project, one that bypasses democratic accountability entirely.

Rather than restricting himself to the caretaker role, Yunus has spearheaded sweeping reforms typically reserved for elected governments. He has dismantled major institutions like the National Board of Revenue, made foreign policy moves with serious regional consequences, and pushed forward domestic agendas that serve his own web of organizations—Grameen Bank, Grameen Telecom, Grameen Employment Services, among others. These interventions go far beyond administrative neutrality.

Meanwhile, court cases against Yunus and his inner circle have been conveniently dismissed, drawing criticism over selective justice. Tax benefits for his institutions have been quietly reinstated, and a new private university under the Grameen brand was approved in record time. These moves raise serious questions about conflicts of interest and the abuse of interim authority.

This isn’t just a technocrat overstepping boundaries. It’s a consolidation of power—one that appears tailored to entrench Yunus’s personal and institutional influence. Under the banner of reform, Bangladesh is witnessing a form of power privatization where public policy is increasingly shaped by one man’s interests, not democratic consensus. What was meant to be a neutral caretaker regime now risks becoming an unelected autocracy in disguise.

The Authoritarian Drift

Bangladesh is witnessing an alarming authoritarian shift, disguised under the veneer of reform and moral superiority. At the center of this emerging power structure is Yunus, now functioning as a de facto head of state without any electoral legitimacy. Political commentators assert, figures like Nahid Islam, Mahfuz Alam, and Asif Mahmud Sajib Bhuiyan have formed a shadow cabinet—an unelected inner circle that is now dictating the political and economic direction of the country.

Their first major move was the banning of the Awami League, the country’s oldest and largest political party, on questionable legal grounds. This act alone signals a direct attack on democratic pluralism. In the name of “restoring order,” the group has begun taking national security decisions behind closed doors, stripping the public of its right to debate matters that directly impact their lives and freedoms.

Press freedom has marked new low with over 167 journalists lost their accreditation cards, false murder charges slapped against at east 266 journalists, around thousands are forced to leave their jobs with many in face of mob violence, imprisonment and arbitrary detentions of journalists are reported alongside while at least 10 media outlet headquarters are vandalised and set ablaze, according to rights bodies. Journalists also faced mounting threats during this period, with 257 subjected to harassment or assault in 152 incidents. Additionally, legal action was taken against 92 journalists under the Cyber Security Act.

The projection of improving rights condition has also torn apart. Reports indicate rule of law has been replaced by mob rule sparking a sense of insecurity among citizens.  Data from rights body Ain o Salish Kendra reveals that 179 individuals have been killed by mob attacks between August 2024 and June 23 this year. The HRSS also documented an alarming rise in custodial deaths and enforced disappearances—40 deaths in jail custody and 14 in law enforcement-related incidents. In the first half of the year, at least 1,042 women and girls were reportedly subjected to sexual violence, with an alarming 60 percent of victims being minors.

The judiciary remains muzzled, dissenting voices are subdued, and the military—once seen as a neutral force—now remains conspicuously silent. This silence speaks volumes.

What we are witnessing is not just political instability—it is a carefully orchestrated coup without tanks or rifles, but one that is just as dangerous, according to a Bangladesh journalist who wished to remain anonymous in fear of safety.  The language of peace and reform is being used as a mask for authoritarian control. If this continues unchecked, the idea of a democratic Bangladesh may soon become a relic of the past.

Humanitarian Corridor or Geopolitical Trojan Horse?

One of the most alarming and reckless moves by the current regime is the planning to establish a so-called “humanitarian corridor” between Chittagong and Myanmar’s Rakhine state. While the government has branded it as an aid route, the operation bears a disturbing resemblance to Western-backed corridors in Libya and Syria—both of which began under the pretext of humanitarianism but later became channels for foreign surveillance, proxy warfare, and armed intervention.

Geopolitical experts alleged that Bangladesh, under the shadow of American influence, may now be covertly supporting the Arakan Army—a rebel group actively fighting the Myanmar military. If true, this marks a dramatic departure from Bangladesh’s long-held policy of regional non-intervention and neutrality. The implications are far-reaching. By aligning with a rebel group in a neighboring country, Bangladesh is not only interfering in another nation’s internal conflict but also inviting retaliatory measures and destabilization at its own borders.

According to multiple accounts, Cox’s Bazar airport—originally meant to serve the tourism industry and humanitarian response for the Rohingya crisis—is reportedly being considered for drone surveillance activities. This raises serious questions about the militarization of civilian infrastructure and the growing foreign footprint in sensitive areas. Border tensions are already simmering. China, India, and the Myanmar junta are all watching with unease.

In effect, Yunus’s administration is dragging Bangladesh into the heart of a regional power struggle it is ill-prepared for. Should conflict intensify, the country could become a frontline state in a new Cold War-style proxy war. For a nation already grappling with internal political turmoil, economic hardship, and the unresolved Rohingya crisis, such strategic adventurism is not only dangerous—it is potentially disastrous.

The Grameen Empire Strikes Back

As stated earlier, the Yunus-led interim regime has moved with startling speed to rehabilitate and empower his own business empire. Within just a few months, tax exemptions were reinstated for Grameen Bank, government stakes were reduced, a new ordinance was swiftly enacted, and regulatory green lights were granted to Grameen’s manpower export company and digital wallet service. Each of these actions, even in ordinary times, would raise eyebrows. But in the context of an unelected government helmed by the very founder of these organizations, they reek of conflict of interest.

Legal experts, economists, and even former associates have voiced concerns. Transparency International Bangladesh has subtly flagged the situation as one involving serious ethical concerns. Eminent scholars have gone further, describing the conduct of the regime as “odd,” “unclean,” and “deeply troubling.” Despite these alarms, the interim administration has refused to engage with criticism, dismissing all concerns as politically motivated noise.

But this is not a debate about politics; it’s a matter of principle. Democracies don’t operate like this. Public office is not meant to be used as a fast lane for private gain, especially by those temporarily entrusted with overseeing a nation in crisis. What is unfolding is not transitional governance—it is authoritarianism in a clean suit, backed by the rhetoric of reform but driven by personal and institutional benefit.

While the Yunus camp insists everything is above board, the optics tell a different story. The speed, the silence, and the self-benefit all paint a disturbing picture. In any functioning democracy, such behavior would face fierce public and institutional scrutiny. Here, it is being normalized—setting a dangerous precedent not only for Bangladesh but for any society teetering between democracy and one-man rule.

A Democracy Hijacked

Power was never the means—it was always the endgame. The quota debate, the protests in the streets, the loud slogans about merit and justice—these were not born from principle. They were carefully chosen tools in a calculated march toward dominance. What we are witnessing now is not the triumph of a movement rooted in justice, but the unveiling of a hunger for power masked in the language of reform.

At the center of it all stands Yunus—not as a visionary, but as a contradiction. Once hailed as a global champion of the poor, he now sits atop a structure built on political maneuvering, not moral clarity. He once vowed to rise above the filth of politics; today, he swims in it. He once warned against dynastic control; now, he rewards allegiance over achievement. He once stood as a critic of state control; today, he is its architect.

His transformation is not accidental—it is essential to the project he leads. His institutions, once celebrated for social good, now serve as networks of influence. His allies, once calling for justice, now silence dissent in the name of unity.

This moment in Bangladesh’s political history will not be remembered as a people’s uprising. It will be recorded as a quiet coup—led not by boots and bullets, but by hashtags and headlines. What we are witnessing is not democracy under strain, but its hijacking under the pretense of saving it.

History will not remember this era as a revolution. It will remember it as the reinvention of tyranny—slick, smart, and self-righteous. And at its center, the man who claimed to change the system by standing above it—only to become its most cunning master.

The Path Forward

The people of Bangladesh must now pause and reflect: is this truly the change they struggled for over the decades? A government that clings to power without the mandate of a fair vote, that crafts laws without meaningful parliamentary debate, and that quietly surrenders national interests through secretive agreements—does this represent the democratic dream of the Liberation War?

Recent events make one thing clear: the real conflict is not about quotas or student protests. These are symptoms, not the disease. At its core, Bangladesh is facing an unprecedented power grab—an erosion of democratic institutions, accountability, and the people’s right to choose. The rise of unelected figures, including Yunus, acting as shadow rulers or “de facto prime ministers,” represents a dangerous distortion of the democratic process. No Nobel prize or international sympathy can justify bypassing the people’s will.

But it is not too late. A path back to democracy still exists. It begins with a commitment to hold fresh elections—genuine, transparent, and inclusive. It demands a return to parliamentary norms, the rule of law, and the full participation of political opposition. Most importantly, it requires all unelected actors, however well-intentioned, to step aside and respect the people’s voice.

This is not just a political crisis—it is a moral one. Bangladesh is not trapped in a mere debate over jobs or reservations; it is fighting for its soul, for the promise of freedom and justice that once united a nation. The world is watching. The future is uncertain. But the people, if united and determined, can still reclaim their country.

Reference

• The Business Standard (2025, June 11),  Three hospitals ‘held hostage’ as discharged July uprising injured keep occupying beds https://www.tbsnews.net/bangladesh/three-hospitals-held-hostage-discharged-july-uprising-injured-keep-occupying-beds-1163011
• The Business Standard (2025, June 28)  ‘All of us were only deceived’: Umama Fatema steps down from Students Against Discrimination https://www.tbsnews.net/bangladesh/all-us-were-only-deceived-umama-fatema-steps-down-students-against-discrimination-1175641
• DW Bangla Service (2025 November 28) How anti-discrimination protesters stoking discrimination https://www.dw.com/bn/%E0%A6%AC%E0%A7%88%E0%A6%B7%E0%A6%AE%E0%A7%8D%E0%A6%AF%E0%A6%AC%E0%A6%BF%E0%A6%B0%E0%A7%8B%E0%A6%A7%E0%A7%80%E0%A6%A6%E0%A7%87%E0%A6%B0-%E0%A6%8F-%E0%A6%95%E0%A7%87%E0%A6%AE%E0%A6%A8-%E0%A6%AC%E0%A7%88%E0%A6%B7%E0%A6%AE%E0%A7%8D%E0%A6%AF/a-70793534
• DW Bangla Service (2025 November 15) No signs of eradicating discrimination https://www.dw.com/bn/%E0%A6%AC%E0%A7%88%E0%A6%B7%E0%A6%AE%E0%A7%8D%E0%A6%AF%E0%A7%87%E0%A6%B0-%E0%A6%9C%E0%A6%9F-%E0%A6%96%E0%A7%8B%E0%A6%B2%E0%A6%BE%E0%A6%B0-%E0%A6%95%E0%A7%8B%E0%A6%A8%E0%A7%8B-%E0%A6%B2%E0%A6%95%E0%A7%8D%E0%A6%B7%E0%A6%A3-%E0%A6%AA%E0%A7%8D%E0%A6%B0%E0%A6%A4%E0%A7%80%E0%A7%9F%E0%A6%AE%E0%A6%BE%E0%A6%A8-%E0%A6%B9%E0%A6%9A%E0%A7%8D%E0%A6%9B%E0%A7%87-%E0%A6%A8%E0%A6%BE/a-70793275
• The Daily Star ( 2025, June 13) July Warriors: Patients who refuse to be just patients https://www.thedailystar.net/opinion/news/july-warriors-patients-who-refuse-be-just-patients-3916001
• New Age ( 2025, May 9) Bangladesh interim govt chief Yunus under criticism over privileges  https://www.newagebd.net/post/country/264412/bangladesh-interim-govt-chief-yunus-under-criticism-over-privileges
• New Age (2025 May 10) Grameen venture clearances create conflict of interests https://www.newagebd.net/post/editorial/264462/grameen-venture-clearances-create-conflict-of-interests
• The Daily Star (July 9, 2025) Where is the rule of law? https://www.thedailystar.net/opinion/editorial/news/where-the-rule-law-3935526