Bangladesh is currently passing through deep instability. Unfortunately, this instability is not merely political; it is moral and social as well. What is unfolding in a country founded on a distinct linguistic identity and cultural ethos is not just political turbulence—it exposes a grave failure of society, the state, and the global human rights regime alike.
In Bangladesh, Islamist student leader Sharif Osman Hadi was murdered. The incident was undeniably tragic, but the reaction that followed stands in complete contradiction to the very objectives in whose name the so-called revolution in Bangladesh was projected last year.
In the immediate aftermath, this murder was linked to India without evidence, and that was enough to grant the anarchic elements an informal license to openly target media institutions, journalists, and minorities under the banner of anti-India sentiment.
There has been neither any evidence of India’s involvement in this murder nor any official investigation confirming such claims. Yet, in line with the ISI’s agenda, public anger was deliberately redirected outward to divert attention from the rot within Bangladeshi society and the failures of the government. Islamist groups operating within the country consciously chose this path.
This makes it abundantly clear which direction Bangladesh is heading in today and how easily public emotions can be provoked and manipulated.
Meanwhile, another horrific incident emerged, but it was buried under the frenzy surrounding Hadi’s killing—a Hindu youth was publicly murdered on allegations of blasphemy.
In Mymensingh, barely an hour away from Dhaka, unspeakable brutality was inflicted on a Hindu youth named Dipu Das. Twenty-five-year-old Dipu Das worked in a garment factory and was the sole breadwinner for his family. He was falsely accused of insulting religion, and as has now become a grim pattern in such blasphemy cases, a mob gathered and began beating him mercilessly. He was beaten to the brink of death. When that was not enough for the perpetrators, they stripped him completely naked, hung him from a tree, and then, in front of hundreds of people, doused him in petrol and burned him alive.
Hundreds of people were present at the scene, yet there was neither fear of the law nor fear of God in anyone’s eyes. On the contrary, the mob appeared to celebrate this barbaric act, as if it were a sacred ritual in which everyone wanted to participate at some level.
Also Read: BSF Shoots Dead Two Bangladeshi Nationals in Meghalaya; BSF on High Alert After Bangladesh Violence
As the killers crossed every conceivable limit of brutality and inhumanity, the chants of the fanatic crowd grew louder in equal measure.
This is the most tragic aspect of the incident: a section of society was not only witnessing this heinous crime but actively celebrating it, in the name of religion and religious duty.
Yet, the news that starkly reflects the growing extremism and religious decay in Bangladeshi society was deliberately framed as a minor side effect of Osman Hadi’s death.
Not only that, India was once again blamed for this atrocity as well. It was claimed that had India not given shelter to Sheikh Hasina, such incidents would not have occurred. India is conducting SIR, infiltrators are being expelled, and the consequences are allegedly being borne by poor Bangladeshis like Dipu. In other words, the same mob that viewed the killing of a “kafir” youth as a sacred ritual and celebrated it as a moral and religious obligation suddenly plays the victim card when accountability is demanded and shifts the blame onto India.
Hadi, an Islamist and representative of an extremist ideology, was accorded national mourning. The entire state machinery bowed its head before him.
But for the Hindu youth who was beaten and burned alive, there was only silence. For the first two days, the police did not even register a case, nor were any arrests made, despite the existence of clear video evidence.
This exposes the selective nature of empathy in today’s Bangladesh.
India is being blamed for internal chaos that it did not create. India had no role whatsoever in Hadi’s death. Yet, anti-India sentiments were deliberately manufactured, and that anger eventually turned inward against minorities. This pattern, in fact, is not new.
Serious questions must also be raised about the role of the Yunus-led arrangement and its allies. Political instability keeps certain groups relevant and provides extremist forces the opportunity to operate under the cover of “public outrage.”
Amid all this, the real victims are ordinary people—especially minorities.
Where are the global human rights defenders now? Those who deliver daily sermons on democracy and freedom—why are their voices silent today? Have they not seen those horrifying videos? Do they feel no outrage?
The US expresses regret over Hadi’s death, yet maintains silence over this demonic act that should shake society to its core. This silence clearly exposes hypocrisy and a selective approach.
Today’s Bangladesh appears to be a society that has lost its moral compass. Its government looks weak and incapable of ensuring equal protection for all citizens. And the global human rights industry appears selective and politically convenient.
