Excessive arrogance, over-talking, and stubbornness sow the seeds of isolation

At this moment, the Awami League is facing its most severe crisis in Bangladesh's political landscape. Due to misgovernance, corruption, and an excessive policy of party favoritism, the party has encountered intense public outrage. Following the departure of its president and former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina from the country, the party's leaders and activists have been left in disarray, facing an uncertain future.

Yet, Awami League has been an integral part of Bangladesh's history and political evolution. It emerged from the masses, transforming from the Awami Muslim League to the East Pakistan Awami League and later to the Bangladesh Awami League, always reflecting the people's aspirations. Throughout history, the party has led mass movements and struggles and has emerged victorious in the people's battles, earning immense love and respect from the nation. However, over time, this same party has become highly controversial and ultimately defeated.

The reasons behind this downfall and the extreme public resentment toward the Awami League have sparked extensive discussions and debates. Various analyses and criticisms have emerged, highlighting numerous factors. Among them, the most significant are excessive arrogance, over-talking or unrestrained speech, intolerable stubbornness, overconfidence, and an obsession with self-importance. From Sheikh Hasina to the majority of the party's central leaders, these traits became evident during their time in power, affecting leaders and activists at different levels. Most ministers and MPs exhibited these flaws, which gradually deepened the crisis. These behaviors initially planted the seeds of the party’s isolation.

After nearly 16 years in power, many Awami League leaders and activists developed a sense of superiority, which eventually turned into persistent stubbornness. Combined with excessive self-confidence, this opened the doors to inevitable damage. Sheikh Hasina often humiliated senior party leaders with harsh words. Even those who had been politically active since the time of Bangabandhu had to silently endure her insults. Despite having qualifications, many senior leaders remained outside her inner circle, while unqualified individuals gained special privileges through flattery of Sheikh Hasina and her family. Allegations against key figures in the government and party were often ignored. Meanwhile, overly self-confident young ministers in Hasina's cabinet focused more on self-preservation in times of crisis rather than addressing the government's or party’s issues.

Observers note that Awami League’s central leadership gradually distanced itself from critical analysis and self-reflection. This situation extended to the grassroots, allowing anti-Awami sentiments to spread from the streets to villages. Initially, opposition activists harbored these sentiments, but eventually, they spread among the general public and even within some party members. As flatterers and opportunists gained influence over Sheikh Hasina’s decision-making, dedicated and loyal party activists grew increasingly frustrated. Over the past 15 years, Awami League at the grassroots level effectively became inactive, transforming into what many called the “Sheikh Hasina League.” This transformation proved to be a significant threat to the party’s survival.

Sheikh Hasina's arrogance and excessive remarks ultimately led to her downfall. She and her party leaders frequently made offhand and reckless statements, which the public found offensive. Although people initially remained silent, they waited for an opportunity. The July Movement provided that opportunity, transforming a student-led protest into a mass uprising. While debates persist about whether the movement was pre-planned, whether conspiracies were involved, or how political parties participated, there is no dispute that the public was united in its demand for the fall of Sheikh Hasina and the Awami League.

Sheikh Hasina and several key leaders often made inappropriate statements while in power. Analysts repeatedly warned that such remarks were unfit for those in positions of responsibility, but these warnings were ignored. In many cases, critics faced intimidation, threats, or even persecution.

Examples of such damaging statements include:
Sheikh Hasina's claim: "Khaleda Zia is enjoying a luxurious life outside prison only because of my generosity." Her controversial remark: "Even my peon owns 400 crore taka and cannot travel without a helicopter." Threatening to cut off electricity for those who criticized corruption in the power sector.

Saying that Khaleda Zia and Dr. Yunus should be thrown off the Padma Bridge. Initially dismissing the 2018 anti-quota movement, then suddenly abolishing the quota system entirely.
Mocking the 2024 quota movement, which further angered the youth.

Obaidul Quader’s arrogant slogan, "Khela Hobe" (The game is on), and his claim that Chhatra League alone could suppress the quota movement. These statements contributed significantly to the growing public resentment against the Awami League and its leadership.

Additionally, continuously undermining political opponents, belittling opposition leaders, and using derogatory terms like “killer” for former President Ziaur Rahman and his family backfired. Sheikh Hasina frequently labeled Khaleda Zia as a thief over the orphanage fund case, but this excessive propaganda eventually turned into a liability for her own party. The combination of derogatory remarks and police harassment of opposition figures alienated not only opposition activists but also many neutral citizens.

Years of uninterrupted power made Sheikh Hasina increasingly self-centered. She insisted on centralizing all decisions, which hindered efficient governance. When journalists questioned whether an over-reliance on her decisions created inefficiencies, she responded by emphasizing her executive authority, insisting that all actions must align with her directives. This mindset led to unnecessary complications in governance, as ministers often hesitated to act without her explicit approval.

Ministers and party leaders continuously linked every initiative to Sheikh Hasina and her family, often naming government projects after Bangabandhu and his family members. While Sheikh Hasina welcomed this, many accused ministers and MPs of using these projects as opportunities for large-scale corruption.

Moreover, any criticism, no matter how constructive, was met with irritation and retaliatory actions, further isolating Sheikh Hasina and her party. Her stubbornness not only weakened the Awami League but also created a political vacuum in the country. Instead of allies, she accumulated enemies, but she failed to recognize this shift. When some advisors attempted to warn her, they were quickly silenced by her sharp retorts, leading many to abandon efforts to guide her. This further empowered sycophants within the party, forming an echo chamber around Sheikh Hasina. Eventually, she found herself trapped in a fortress of military, bureaucratic, and opportunistic flatterers, which ultimately pushed her towards complete political isolation.

(To be continued...)