The Economist: Award or patting US back for regime change

The Economist has named Bangladesh as the “Country of the year” for 2024 for its progress towards a more “liberal government” by toppling the “autocratic regime” led by Sheikh Hasina through “revolution led by students” which The Economist and many US Intellectuals have termed as Gen Z Revolution.

Every December, The Economist magazine awards this title to a country who achieves “positive strides” in that particular year. Naming Bangladesh as the “country of the year” is itself sufficient to make one understand the relevance and the credibility the award holds. 

It’s too hard to figure out what positive strides the magazine saw Bangladesh gaining. The genocide of Bangladeshi Minority Hindus for the sole reason of their faith and undemocratic takeover of the country certainly does not come into the very definition of positive strides. We must note how The Economist held the democratically elected Sheikh Hasina government as an autocratic regime and the undemocratic holding of a country as the epitome of liberalism. The release of the worst of the Islamists/terrorists by the Mohammed Yunus regime may be the height of liberalism in a country for The Economist.  The runner-up for this year’s accolade is Syria, where the removal of Bashar al-Assad on December 8 marked the resurgence of ISIS in the country which is a phenomenon of ‘positive stride’ for The Economist. 

By repeatedly awarding nations embroiled in turmoil and crises, The Economist has undermined the credibility of its “Country of the Year” title. Instead of celebrating genuine achievements, it glorify situations that exacerbate instability and conflict under the guise of progress. Let us look at the countries that were awarded with The Economist’s title of being the best country. 

In 2014, Tunisia was honored for its strides towards democracy following the Arab Spring. Yet, this year was marked by political instability because of  the assassination of politician Mohamed Brahmi, which intensified unrest. Similarly, Myanmar’s selection in 2015 was overshadowed by the worsening Rohingya crisis, with escalating violence and displacement gaining global attention. This catastrophic humanitarian crisis starkly contrasted the positive narrative.

Colombia, recognized in 2016 for its peace agreement with FARC, also faced challenges. The agreement was initially rejected in a referendum, revealing deep divisions within the country and requiring renegotiation. France’s 2017 recognition, arguably one of the few optimistic cases, followed Emmanuel Macron’s election. However, subsequent years saw his presidency face domestic unrest, including the “Yellow Vest” protests. While the European nation is better-placed than its peers mentioned in the bunkum The Economist recognisition list, the Islamist forces have often shown their buldeogning presence by repeatedly taking to the streets and carrying out large scale violence on one pretext or the other. 

Also Read: ‘Malicious report’: Foreign Ministry trashes USCIRF report on Religious freedom; flags no concern under ‘puppet’ government in Bangladesh

Armenia’s Velvet Revolution earned it the title in 2018 for a peaceful transition of power, but the country later faced geopolitical challenges, notably the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.

Uzbekistan’s recognition in 2019 came amid constitutional amendments extending presidential terms, raising concerns about authoritarian consolidation under Shavkat Mirziyoyev.

Malawi’s 2020 accolade followed a landmark judicial annulment of its presidential election, but the rerun highlighted lingering political vulnerabilities.

Italy’s selection in 2021 stemmed from Mario Draghi’s leadership during a government crisis. 

And in 2024, the award has been handed over to Bangladesh which is overseeing the worst of the genocide upon its minority population based on religion. In August 2024, a democratically elected leader Sheikh Hasina was forced to leave the country and brought Mohammed Yunus to be crowned through a ‘revolutionary student protest’ which was nothing but an politically motivated Islamist protests in the garb of student rebellion. 

After the ouster of Sheik Hasina, hundreds of protesters barged into the Gonobhaban, the official residence of the Prime Minister where they vandalised and stole the things present in Sheikh Hasina’s residence . The protesters got into Sheikh Hasina’s room vandalised the furnitures present and also looted her wardrobe. The visuals on 5th of August,2024 saw men steelings undergarments, bras and displaying the bras as trophies.

Bangladesh also saw the vandalising of Mujibur Rehman’s statues who was the founding father of Bangladesh. They also destroyed the Nation’s heritage, Bangabandhu Memorial Museum in the Dhanmondi area in Dhaka which was dedicated to Sheikh Hasina’s father, Sheikh Mujibur Rahman. 

Was this the ‘revolutionary student protest’, The Economist handed over its ‘country of the year’ award to Bangladesh for?? The violent protesters did not stop here. Ever since Muhammad Yunus took over Bangladesh, the Bangladeshi Hindus have seen the worst of hell. Hindus have been attacked and persecuted in at least 27 districts of Bangladesh which included mob violence,murders, rapes, the burning of homes and businesses, vandalism of temples, and the desecration of religious idols. Hindu teachers and academicians have been purged on a massive scale with over 100 of them being forced to resign by Islamist mobs who stormed and held them hostage in their offices solely because of their Hindu identity. The genocide continues to unfold itself with the support of the Mohammed Yunus dispensation and Bangladeshi Army too playing a significant role in carrying out the apartheid.

The freedom fighters of the state of Bangladesh were too humiliated by the so-called ‘student’ protesters. Videos have surfaced over the social media where some were seen to be bullied and forced to wear a garland of shoes. The Economist and the US Intelligentsia must introspect whether this is how the Gen Z revolution looks like!!!