21 August, 21 August 2004, Analysis, Awami League, Bangladesh, grenade attack, Opinion, Politics

The tale of 21 August grenade attack in Bangladesh

Jahanara Nuri 20 August 2025

The crimson monsoon Early rainy season’s subtle steps was felt in the hot, humid afternoon in Dhaka on August 21, 2004. Bangladesh. The sun hung low on the horizon, shadows of people and everything around them stretched long across Dhaka’s bustling Bangabandhu Avenue. The city's pulse beat fervently as thousands convened for the peace rally of Awami League— a party accustomed to the shadow of political strife since 1949-announced its stand against violence. Their rally was initially planned for Muktangon, the venue shifted to the broad crossroads near the Party headquarters after the permission for Muktangon was not available. The megacity's atmosphere mirrored the rally's intent—solemn yet resolute. At the heart of the gathering, Sheikh Hasina, the leader of the Awami League, stood on a truck. Encircled by leaders spanning generations of the party, she addressed the crowd with a voice of steely determination, condemning terrorism and championing justice and democracy. Waves of supporters, brandishing banners and flags, cheered her

on, their hope defying the precarious political climate. At precisely 5:22 PM, the air buzzed with anticipation as Sheikh Hasina concluded her speech with the defiant cry, “Joy Bangla, Joy Bangabandhu.” "I had barely completed my speech and was going to get down from the truck when I heard a big bang and the next moment blood splashed on my body." The ear-splitting explosion of a grenade detonated just yards from Hasina's podium sent a cascade of shrapnel into the crowd and shattered the assembly's energy. Chaos erupted. Screams of terror mingled with the acrid smell of gunpowder as panic swept through the sea of people, scattering them like leaves in a gale. The human and the bulletproof barrier In a swift and seamless motion, leaders around Sheikh Hasina formed a protective human shield with a singular, instinctive resolve, their outstretched arms defying the onslaught and helping her get into the car with security personnel. Time seemed to suspend; the…

Analysis, Bangladesh, Current Affairs, Myanmar, United Nations, USA

Corridor Nation: How the OHCHR MoU and US NDA Threaten Bangladesh’s Sovereignty

Iconus Clustus 5 August 2025

The OHCHR MoU and the US NDA aren’t isolated events—they’re interlocking tools in a new strategy to turn Bangladesh into a geopolitical corridor. Under the guise of rights and trade, they erode sovereignty, silence resistance, and open the floodgates to foreign control. This isn’t partnership. It’s prelude to possession—with a handshake, not a hammer.

5 August 2025

Introduction: Sovereignty by Stealth In July 2025, two international agreements quietly positioned themselves at the heart of Bangladesh’s geopolitical destiny. One was a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) signed between Bangladesh and the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), granting the UN body a permanent presence in Dhaka. The other was a leaked draft of a proposed Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA) between Bangladesh and the United States, setting the terms for deepened bilateral cooperation—on Washington’s terms. Individually, these instruments might seem routine. Together, they chart the contours of a new and dangerous architecture: Bangladesh as a "corridor nation"—a strategic conduit for Western security and economic interests, locked in from within by humanitarian oversight and from without by asymmetrical trade and security arrangements. This is a story not of occupation by force, but by framework. I. The OHCHR MoU: Human Rights or Hegemony? At first glance, the OHCHR’s new Dhaka office appears to be a benign institutional step—an

extension of international support for Bangladesh’s human rights obligations. Yet this MoU arrives in the aftermath of a political transition shaped by foreign pressure and domestic unrest. Its timing is more than symbolic; it is strategic. The OHCHR’s February 2025 report on protest-related violence conspicuously sidestepped key facts, including attacks on law enforcement and public property. Notably absent were the deaths of police officers and the documented instigation of violence by opposition-aligned groups. By legitimizing a one-sided narrative, the OHCHR's presence becomes more than observational—it becomes constitutive. It reframes political violence as civilian resistance and erases the culpability of coordinated agitators. What’s more troubling is the legal immunity granted under the MoU. UN officials enjoy broad protections under international conventions, often beyond the reach of local judicial oversight. In effect, the OHCHR becomes an untouchable actor within Bangladesh's borders, with privileged access to state institutions, data, and civil society—and no local accountability. While the MoU’s full text has not been…

Analysis, Bangladesh, Current Affairs, Journalism, Review

Guilty before Trial: A Dissection of Al Jazeera’s “36 Days in July”

Iconus Clustus 27 July 2025

Al Jazeera’s “36 Days in July” is not journalism—it is a selectively sourced, politically motivated character assassination. By platforming figures tied to extremist groups and omitting critical legal and historical context, it weaponizes leaked audio to vilify Sheikh Hasina and legitimize a coup born of coordinated violence.

27 July 2025

1: The Spectacle Disguised as Journalism Al Jazeera’s “HASINA – 36 Days in July” is marketed as an investigative documentary. In truth, it functions as a media indictment. From framing to narration, from sourcing to visual mood-setting, the entire feature seems less interested in investigating the truth than in delivering a preordained verdict: Sheikh Hasina is guilty. Al Jazeera and the BBC, in their respective pieces, center their accusations on a short leaked audio clip — barely 80 seconds long — which they treat as a smoking gun. For the sake of brevity, this article will only focus on Al Jazeera Documentary. This audio captures a voice that has allegedly been attributed to the former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, issuing directives in the midst of a violent uprising. The audio, at the time of publishing, is neither forensically authenticated nor interpreted with journalistic caution. Worse, its use is framed within a montage of insinuations, selective voices, and emotionally charged imagery,

producing what can only be described as trial-by-media. Yet the words themselves offer no blanket order for violence, let alone student killings. The central "evidence" of this so-called investigation — the short leaked audio clip — that this documentary and the BBC feature appeared within days of each other, using the same core audio material and overlapping narrative structure, raises serious questions about coordination — if not lobbying. It is not implausible to suspect that this is not independent journalism but a synchronized narrative push, especially considering the actors it platformed and the timing with an ongoing legal trial. 2: The So-Called Smoking Gun – A Short Audio, A Long Stretch In the audio materials, the individual in question can be heard stating: “I have told them — if necessary, shoot… Students’ lives must be saved… But if anyone creates terror, if there’s no other way — you must act.” The voice in the audio reveals a response to a…

Analysis, Bangladesh, Current Affairs, USA

Trading Sovereignty: The Hidden Price of the U.S.-Bangladesh Tariff Agreement

Robi Das 19 July 2025

The proposed U.S.-Bangladesh Reciprocal Tariff Agreement is a stark threat to Bangladesh’s sovereignty and economic independence. While promising reduced tariffs on garments, it demands sweeping concessions that serve U.S. interests alone. The draft imposes structural subordination, forcing Bangladesh to mirror American embargoes, compromise its trade alliances, and surrender regulatory control. It lacks genuine reciprocity and risks destabilising domestic industries and foreign policy. This agreement must not proceed without full public disclosure, parliamentary scrutiny, and a renegotiation that defends national interest and economic justice. Signing it as-is would be a grave betrayal of Bangladesh’s sovereignty and a dangerous precedent for future diplomacy.

19 July 2025

Background The U.S. and Bangladesh have entered intense negotiations to finalise a Reciprocal Tariff Agreement aimed at reducing tariffs on Bangladeshi exports to the U.S., particularly in the ready-made garments (RMG) sector, which is Bangladesh's largest export category to the U.S. The Bangladesh government sought to conceal the details of the terms and conditions imposed by the U.S. government. Thanks to Officer Mukitul Hasan of the National Board of Revenue (NBR), we obtained the details of the 21-page draft agreement. Bangladesh government suspended Mukit and filed a sedition case against him. For a clause-wise review of the agreement please read the article of Iconus Clustus on Muktangon. The contents of the draft agreement do not give much space to Bangladesh. The plain and simple message of U.S. government is “either it’s my way, or highway”. Bangladesh is clearly in a dilemma. If it agrees to the terms and conditions, it will lose China, which is one of the biggest sources

of raw material. Without the raw material from China, a lot of businesses will not be able to offer their products in cheaper price. Bangladesh, if agrees to this agreement, will lose China as a development and commercial partner. China will not take it easily. The fallout with China will also compromise the foreign policy of Bangladesh, I.e., friendship with everyone, hostility with none. In this article, we will examine the structure of the proposed agreement, discuss its key highlights and primary concerns, which will illustrate why the Bangladesh government sought to conceal the agreement's details. The article will also show you the ‘colonial’ mentality of the U.S. government will further cripple the economy of Bangladesh. Structure of the Agreement The agreement is divided into six major sections, each containing over a hundred conditions: Tax-related conditions Non-tariff barrier conditions Digital trade and technology conditions Rules of Origin conditions Economic and national security conditions Commercial conditions Key U.S. Proposals and…

Analysis, Bangladesh

Whistleblowing as a Civic Duty: Upholding Mukit’s Stand for Integrity

Robi Das 18 July 2025

In Bangladesh today, speaking truth to power can feel like standing alone in a storm. Mukit’s stand reminds us that every citizen carries the power—and responsibility—to safeguard the common good. It’s on us, as a society and as a government, to ensure that when conscience strikes, it finds not chains, but open doors and a grateful nation.

18 July 2025

In Bangladesh today, speaking truth to power can feel like standing alone in a storm. Mukit chose that storm. When he exposed misuse of public resources within a government institution, he did more than bare corruption—he performed an act of public service. What Did Mukit Do: Mukitul Hasan, Second Secretary at the Customs Policy Wing of the National Board of Revenue (NBR), has been suspended for allegedly leaking a classified state document. The leaked material pertained to sensitive tariff negotiations between Bangladesh and the United States, which were protected under a non-disclosure agreement (NDA). The breach was considered a serious violation of official discipline, especially given Hasan’s direct involvement in the negotiation process. A Bengali-language media outlet had published a report based on the leaked document, which was later withdrawn. In response, the NBR filed a case and issued the suspension order, signed by Chairman Abdur Rahman Khan. Separately, M Zillur Rahman, Deputy Director of the Central Intelligence Cell,

was also suspended for publicly tearing his transfer order, alongside 14 other officials facing similar disciplinary action. Mukit’s Courage and Its Costs Mukit’s decision to disclose wrongdoing wasn’t born of personal vendetta. He witnessed funds diverted from essential healthcare projects and watched promises to the poorest slip away. By going public, he risked career derailment, social ostracism, and even legal harassment under outdated secrecy laws. Yet Mukit’s bravery shines as a beacon: it reminds us that transparency isn’t optional. It’s the lifeblood of democracy and trust. The Legal Shield in Bangladesh The Public Interest Information Disclosure (Provide Protection) Act of 2011 was designed precisely for voices like Mukit’s: Legal Immunity: He cannot face criminal, civil, or departmental action for revealing truthful, public-interest information. Confidentiality: His identity is protected unless he opts into disclosure. Protection from Retaliation: Demotion, forced retirement, harassment—all barred if he’s a government employee. Evidence Shielding: Disclosures can’t be used against him in proceedings unless found maliciously false. …