Why is Muhammad Yunus embracing religious persecution?

The appointment of Muhammad Yunus as the head of Bangladesh’s interim government following Sheikh Hasina's removal in a revolutionary wave was met with cautious optimism. For many, the Nobel laureate represented a clean break from the past—a figure of global renown who could restore credibility to a faltering political system. But we must not allow Yunus’s celebrity to blind us to the reality of his actions. His first major decision—inviting the fundamentalist group Hefazat-e-Islam into his administration—has already set a dangerous precedent. Far from heralding a new dawn, Yunus seems poised to repeat the mistakes of the past, casting a long shadow over Bangladesh’s future.

Hefazat-e-Islam, a hardline Islamist group rooted in the madrasa system, is notorious for its regressive 13-point demand from 2013—a manifesto that openly calls for the imposition of Sharia law, the segregation of women, persecution of Ahmadiyya and Christian preachers, and the death penalty for blasphemy. These demands mirror the ideology of the Taliban, a comparison that is as troubling as it is accurate. By legitimising Hefazat, Yunus risks empowering a faction whose values are antithetical to democracy, pluralism, and human rights.

Shahriar Kabir: A Victim of Extremism

The arrest of Shahriar Kabir, a renowned children's author, human rights campaigner, and former Amnesty International Prisoner of Conscience, is a stark reminder of the consequences of Yunus's alliance with Hefazat. Kabir, known for his fearless opposition to religious extremism, has been jailed under allegations initiated by Hefazat radicals, who accuse him of crimes against humanity for his outspoken secular stance. This is not just an attack on an individual but a chilling message to all who dare to challenge extremist ideologies.

Kabir’s detention raises profound questions about Yunus's leadership. Why is a government led by a Nobel laureate permitting the persecution of secular activists? Why is it tolerating a vendetta orchestrated by a group whose ideology undermines the very foundations of Bangladesh’s pluralistic society? The answers point to a disturbing reality: Yunus’s administration is prioritising political expediency over human rights, effectively enabling Hefazat to pursue its regressive agenda unchecked.

Why Aren't International Partners Speaking Out?

The silence of international partners in the face of Kabir’s arrest is equally troubling. While the global community often champions human rights, its hesitance to pressure Yunus’s interim government suggests a worrying double standard. This lack of action risks emboldening Yunus’s administration to continue down a path that compromises Bangladesh’s secular and democratic ideals.

International partners may be exercising caution, hoping to support a stable transition after Sheikh Hasina’s ouster. However, stability achieved at the expense of human rights is a false promise. The international community’s failure to condemn Kabir’s detention not only undermines its credibility but also signals tacit approval of a government that is aligning itself with extremist forces.

The Mirage of Celebrity and the Perils of Power

It is easy to be seduced by Yunus’s reputation as the pioneer of microfinance and a global advocate for the poor. His accolades, including the Nobel Peace Prize, have long shielded him from scrutiny. But as the history of South Asia teaches us, good intentions and international acclaim do not guarantee good governance. Yunus’s willingness to align with Hefazat is not an isolated misstep; it is a calculated move that reflects a deeper pattern in Bangladesh’s political landscape—a pattern of appeasement, cynicism, and the perpetuation of old power structures.

Repeating the Mistakes of the Past

The Joj Mia affair, which I explored in The Global Order, serves as a cautionary tale about the dangers of manipulated narratives and cynical political alliances. In that case, an innocent man was scapegoated to shield those in power, exposing how easily principles can be sacrificed for convenience. Yunus’s alliance with Hefazat is a similar betrayal—not just of secularism, but of the very ideals he claims to uphold. By inviting a group whose ideology is rooted in intolerance and repression, Yunus is undermining the secular foundations of Bangladesh and repeating the errors of leaders who sought stability through capitulation.

Hardly a New Dawn

Bangladesh’s war of independence was fought for a vision of a pluralistic and inclusive nation—a vision that Hefazat’s ideology directly opposes. Yunus’s decision to bring them into his administration is not just a political misstep; it is a clear indication that his government is anything but a new dawn for Bangladesh. Instead, it feels like a rehash of old politics, where the pursuit of power trumps principles and the spectre of extremism looms ever larger.

What Lies Ahead?

The arrest of Shahriar Kabir, the alliance with Hefazat, and the international community’s failure to act are all dark omens for Bangladesh’s future. If history has taught us anything, it is that appeasing extremists is a Faustian bargain—one that leads not to stability, but to the erosion of democracy and the empowerment of forces that thrive on division and fear.

Muhammad Yunus may have entered politics under the banner of change, but his actions tell a different story. By aligning with Hefazat and allowing the persecution of secular activists like Kabir, he is not charting a new course for Bangladesh; he is steering it back into the treacherous waters of religious fundamentalism and political expediency. This is not a new dawn. It is the same old game—played with higher stakes and darker consequences.