On December 14, 2023, Shahriar Shihab was returning home through the University of Dhaka after paying tribute to the martyred intellectuals killed by the Pakistani military on the same date in 1971 during the Liberation War. Suddenly a group of 20-25 young men surrounded Shihab and began to assault him.
“At one point, they grabbed my beard and accused me of being a member of Bangladesh Chhatra Shibir, the student wing of Bangladesh Jamaat-e-Islami (JI). Then they slapped me. It was absurd,” said Shihab, the organizing secretary of the Bangladesh Students’ Union, Private University Unit, and a student at Prime University in Dhaka.
“I’m a leftist activist involved in leftist student politics. However, as a practicing Muslim, I keep beards, and they tagged me as a Shibir member,” he told The Diplomat.
It was one example among many of how Bangladesh’s leftists are often conflated with larger political forces. In Shihab’s case, his activism demanding accountability from Bangladesh’s then-government saw him wrongly labeled an Islamist.
Shihab became involved in leftist politics after the 2018 student protests for road safety, joining through direct street activism. Since then, he has participated in various left-leaning political activities under organizations like the Bangladesh Students’ Union, Bangladesh Chhatra Odhikar Parishad, and Ganatantrik Chhatra Jote. Before the day of the attack, Shihab and his peers had organized a protest in Shahbagh, Dhaka, condemning the killing of four people in the Chittagong Hill Tracts.
“On December 14, another friend of mine was attacked elsewhere,” Shihab recounted. “We were both on their target list because of our consistent efforts to mobilize protests against government policies and societal injustices. Both of us were severely injured – my friend nearly lost his eye.”
Over the past 15 years, leftist activists like Shihab have faced trauma and violence, often targeted by law enforcement and members of the Bangladesh Chhatra League (BCL), the student wing of Awami League (AL).
During the July 2024 student-led uprising in Bangladesh, Shihab and his fellow activists actively participated alongside general students and members of mainstream political parties. This movement highlighted a rare moment of unity across diverse ideologies, demonstrating the shared frustrations with the then ruling regime AL.
Despite their legacy of activism – whether opposing authoritarianism, addressing everyday crises, or raising their voices for workers’ and farmers’ rights – Bangladesh’s leftist groups remain marginalized in the broader political discourse. Why do their secular and liberal ideals fail to resonate more widely? And what lies ahead for them in the post Hasina Bangladesh?
Bangladesh’s Political Landscape and the Left
Bangladesh’s political landscape has long been dominated by the fierce rivalry between the AL and the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP), leaving little room for other voices. Yet the country’s leftist political groups, though smaller in size and influence, have remained steadfast in their advocacy for justice, equality, and the rights of ordinary citizens.
Over the past 15 years under the AL’s autocratic rule, many leftist activists have consistently taken to the streets to oppose oppression and challenge the status quo – often at great personal risk and without the spotlight that shines on mainstream political actors.
During the 1960s and 1970s in then-East Pakistan, leftist ideologies, including Marxism, Maoism, and socialism, were pivotal in mobilizing people against autocratic rule. Parties like the Purbo Banglar Communist Party (PBCP) were influential during the Liberation War, advocating for a classless, equitable society. However, internal divisions weakened their impact on national politics.
The Communist Party of East Pakistan (later Bangladesh) split into two factions: the pro-Moscow faction, which supported the liberation movement and aligned with the Indo-Soviet socialist bloc, and the pro-Beijing faction, which opposed Bangladesh’s independence and advocated for a complete revolution. These divisions became especially visible during the Liberation War, with the pro-Moscow wing working alongside the AL to achieve independence, while the pro-Beijing wing criticized the movement as incomplete.
The Maoist-inspired groups, such as Siraj Sikder’s East Bengal Workers Movement (EBWM) and later the Purbo Bangla Sarbohara Party (PBSP), initially fought against Pakistan but then rejected Sheikh Mujibur Rahman’s leadership and his vision of socialism. Disillusioned by what they saw as a “puppet government,” these groups sought to establish a revolutionary socialist state, leading to clashes with the newly formed government. Their militant actions and opposition contributed to political instability, culminating in Mujib’s downfall in 1975. However, the decline of Maoist ideology in China left these revolutionaries without international support, weakening their influence in Bangladesh.
Overall, however, the left gained prominence in the 1971 Liberation War. Some leftist elements during that time allied with the AL to win Bangladesh’s freedom from West Pakistan. They forged connections with the masses while encouraging the general public, smallholder farmers, and the working class to support the movement. In addition, leftist groups also helped in instilling and directing ordinary people toward the tasks of the freedom struggle, which highly mobilized the movement’s rapid growth.
After the religion-based parties were banned in 1972, the leftist parties found themselves as the only oppositional parties. However, they were faced with conflicts both with the AL and with each other, so the left as a whole was never seen as serious political force.
Mujib took advantage of those divisions among the left by overthrowing one and forming the Bangladesh Krishak Sramik Awami League (BAKSAL), a single party system. This amendment changed the political setting in Bangladesh and many parties were combined under the BAKSAL which included the ruling AL, Muzaffar Ahmed’s National Awami Party (NAP), and some executive members of the Communist Party.
Such restraints notwithstanding, the left did not remain apathetic in the early years of independent Bangladesh and instead worked toward economic and administrative developments. They were internationalist in scope and advocated for a society based on egalitarian values devoid of oppression. The Communist Party advocated for the cause of the working people and offered a different view of development built on fairness and social welfare. This egalitarian vision set the left apart from even the initial AL, as they wanted to build a better and more cohesive community.
In the post-independence period, the AL, led by Mujib, initially pursued socialist policies, such as nationalizing major industries and banks, as part of their vision for a self-reliant and egalitarian society. However, this period also saw limitations on freedom of expression and dissent. Leftist groups, particularly those critical of the AL’s policies or approach, faced suppression, including the curbing of media freedoms. For example, the government consolidated all newspapers into state-controlled outlets under the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution in 1975. This move effectively stifled press freedom and centralized state control over public discourse.
The assassination of Mujib in 1975 marked another political turning point. The subsequent regimes gradually abandoned socialist policies, shifting toward a market-oriented economy. This transition marginalized leftist parties, reducing their influence in the country’s political landscape. As Bangladesh moved away from its initial socialist ideals, leftist movements struggled to maintain their foothold amidst the growing dominance of capitalist and centrist political forces.
During the military regimes of Ziaur Rahman and Hussain Muhammad Ershad, leftist groups faced significant suppression alongside their efforts to resist their rule. Zia, while promoting economic liberalization and lifting the ban on religious political parties, notably oppressed leftist movements such as the Jatiya Samajtantrik Dal (JASAD), whose leaders and activists were frequently targeted. Zia’s policies of reconciliation with Islamist forces marginalized the left further, undermining their influence in the political landscape.
Founded in 1972 by leaders like Serajul Alam Khan, JASAD sought to establish a socialist democracy in Bangladesh, driven by ideals of equality and anti-imperialism. However, the party’s radical approach, including the formation of the militant Gonobahini, made it a direct adversary to both the state and mainstream political forces. This opposition to authoritarianism and economic liberalization intensified its suppression during Zia’s regime, ensuring its further marginalization in Bangladesh’s political framework.
However, in 1980 the party started to back away from the goal to establish a socialist society. Later in the 1990s they started to embrace nationalism.
Many experts think the fall of leftism in the Soviet Union in 1992 was behind this shift in sentiment within JASAD. The Soviet collapse not only affected JASAD but also the whole left political landscape in Bangladesh.
Under Hussain Muhammad Ershad, leftist parties joined forces with centrist and right-wing groups in anti-autocratic movements, demonstrating their capacity for grassroots mobilization despite limited electoral success. Their role in uniting opposition forces was critical during the pro-democracy struggles of the 1980s. However, the fall of Ershad in 1990 marked a turning point. In the post-Ershad era, the political arena became increasingly polarized between the Awami League and the Bangladesh Nationalist Party, leaving leftist parties struggling to maintain relevance amid the dominance of the two major political forces.
In the last 15 years under the AL’s rule, leftist parties have faced severe oppression, further limiting their political influence. The government’s control over institutions, media, and law enforcement has stifled dissenting voices, including those from the left. Leftist activists have been subjected to harassment, arbitrary arrests, and political persecution. The Workers’ Party’s leader, Rashed Khan Menon, aligned with the AL, but faced significant backlash and was eventually arrested following Hasina’s ouster.
Grassroots leftist activism remains vibrant in labor unions, garment factories, and among rural communities, addressing wage inequality and labor rights. However, the rise of neoliberal policies and the dominance of identity-based politics have overshadowed class-based movements. Contemporary leftist parties, including the CPB, Workers’ Party, and Socialist Party of Bangladesh, have limited representation and operate on the periphery, focusing on workers’ rights, anti-globalization, and social justice. Their inability to adapt to contemporary challenges, build coalitions, and effectively communicate their relevance to younger generations has hindered their growth.
The 2013 controversy over the International Crimes Tribunal, established to prosecute those responsible for atrocities during the 1971 Liberation War, deepened Bangladesh’s democratic decline and widened the divide between secular and Islamist political forces. While leftist forces succeeded in concluding the tribunal, their broader influence has remained weak. The AL’s consolidation of power during this period further marginalized the left, leaving them with a diminished role in national politics.
Bangladesh’s left political landscape today reflects a fragmented and marginalized force. While their contributions to historical movements are undeniable, their struggle to counter Bangladesh’s growing authoritarianism and rightward political shift raises critical questions about their future. Institutional and ideological limitations, coupled with systematic suppression, continue to prevent them from becoming significant players in the country’s evolving political landscape.
Why Has the Left Gained So Little Traction?
Political scientist Tahmina Rahman highlighted that most experts she interviewed believe Bangladeshi leftist parties lack a distinct voice compared to their moderate counterparts. Historically, leftist parties sought to avoid confrontation with authoritarian regimes by aligning themselves with mainstream political forces. This strategy, driven by dictatorial repression and legal constraints, allowed them to pursue shared objectives, such as achieving independence from Pakistan and ending military rule. However, it also kept them subordinate to larger parties.
The dependence deepened after the restoration of democracy in 1991, as coalition politics further limited the left’s capacity to promote their agenda.
A seasoned leftist politician explained that while coalition politics offers certain advantages, it also leads to a reluctance to challenge oppression or advocate for significant legal changes. He described this as an “opportunist tendency,” noting that fear of losing the perks of alliances often results in leftist parties appearing inactive, whether in Parliament or on the streets. This dependency, the politician argued, is a major drawback of forming alliances with dominant parties.
Leftist parties in coalition often become less able to hold centrist parties accountable and push for alternative policy proposals. The leading parties, too, take advantage of this dependency by not taking leftist policy proposals into consideration.
Dilara Chowdhury, former professor of the Government and Politics department at Jahangirnagar University, believes there is a significant communication gap between urban and rural areas when it comes to left politics. “Leftist discourse is often appealing, but they have failed to connect with people in rural areas,” she told The Diplomat. “As a result, radical parties enjoy greater popularity in villages compared to leftist groups. While leftist parties claim to have thousands of activists outside urban centers, in reality, I don’t see much evidence of that.”
Ruhin Hossain Prince, the general secretary of the CPB, also thinks that communication with the people needs to be strengthened.
“I can confidently say that the majority of the left political parties always come to the streets to raise voices against injustice. However, despite the enthusiasm we couldn’t do well in the electoral system. Somehow we have failed to get enough publicity,” he said.
Another challenge is the atheist image of the left and progressive politics – a problem in this devoutly Muslim country.
Leftists in Bangladesh are often labeled as atheists, a perception that hampers their efforts to establish robust grassroots networks and a loyal voter base due to the prevalent anti-atheist sentiment in the country. In rural areas, openly identifying as an atheist can provoke intense disapproval, with many viewing atheism as deeply unsettling. This stigma has been reinforced by propaganda campaigns from authoritarian regimes both before and after Bangladesh’s independence, which portrayed leftists as irreligious and impious.
“The atheist image was a successful propaganda against us,” Prince acknowledged. However, he added, “We raise our voices for labor class people. We actually don’t see the sentiment that much.”
Adding to these challenges is the lack of sufficient media coverage for leftist movements and ideologies. As media organizations in Bangladesh are largely products of capitalist systems, their priorities often align with corporate and political interests rather than grassroots activism. Dominated by the incumbent power, “mainstream media tend to marginalize or ignore leftist voices,” said Prince, focusing instead on the two dominant political parties: the AL and BNP.
This media bias further reduces the visibility of leftist struggles and their role in addressing systemic inequalities, reinforcing the public perception of their irrelevance. Without platforms to amplify their causes, leftist activists face immense difficulty in challenging the narratives shaped by capitalist forces and the ruling elite, leaving them sidelined in Bangladesh’s political discourse.
Both religious and nationalist groups portray leftists as disconnected from the country’s cultural and religious values. The association of leftist ideologies with atheism, despite not being universally accurate, has alienated many potential supporters, particularly in the conservative heartlands of Bangladesh.
For example, during the Shahbagh Protest in 2013, radical factions accused leftist demonstrators advocating for the execution of 1971 war criminals of being “anti-Islamic,” resulting in violence and increased division. Such narratives persist in undermining the left’s capacity for forging alliances with larger populations, particularly in hinterland regions where faith is of paramount importance.
Moreover, the leftist parties’ failure to update their methods of interaction with younger voters also adds to their tumult. Radical Islamists have been able to utilize social media, mobilize the grassroots, and increase their influence through religious organizations such as madrassas, while the leftist groups are rather slow to catch up with the digital revolution.
Additionally, the leftist political parties are apparently also burdened with the problem of establishing a unified front. They are still factionalized, with some advocating for pure ideology to the exclusion of coalition strategies. This disarray limits their capacity to confront the dominance of the AL, the BNP, and religious parties. To that end, absent organizational cohesiveness, groups on the left are unable to affect national politics or elections in a meaningful way.
The Road Ahead
Fresh air has been sweeping over Bangladesh since the fall of the AL, with people eagerly anticipating the upcoming parliamentary elections within one and half years. The process is currently underway under the Interim government led by Nobel laureate Muhammad Yunus. An election commission has been formed to ensure free and fair elections, a significant step after more than a decade of concerns over electoral integrity.
As previously mentioned, left-wing politicians, activists, and supporters were vocal and active during the July Revolution. While many are optimistic about the future of leftist politics, others remain uncertain about what lies ahead.
After the 1990 uprising that led to the ouster of General Ershad, the 1991 parliamentary election was a disappointment for leftist parties, despite their efforts to restore democracy. In that poll, BAKSAL and the Bangladesh Communist Party each won five seats, while the National Awami League, Democratic Party, and People’s Party each won one seat. These parties were allied with the AL at the time, which secured 88 seats, while the BNP won 140 seats and formed the government.
Given this historical context, it’s difficult to predict that leftist parties will perform well in the upcoming elections, despite their struggles under the previous regime and participation in the recent uprising. Furthermore, radical groups are gaining traction and planning to form a coalition of Islamist political parties, already enjoying substantial support from the Muslim-majority population.
Prince weighed in on the situation, stating that now may not be the right time for left-wing politics to thrive. “There are powerful radical groups and imperialist forces that can overshadow leftist politics in the country,” he warned. “To mitigate this risk, we need to establish a minimum democratic environment. If these powerful forces don’t dominate and if we are allowed to work freely, I believe there’s a strong possibility for left-wing politics to rise.”
Prince continued, “However, after August 5, we still feel there are significant threats from certain groups. For instance, in Tetulia, we recently tried to mobilize a protest, but members of a powerful faction prevented us from holding it. I was there.”
Despite the challenges, many hold onto hope for a brighter future, especially youth activists and politicians.
Dr. Monisha Chakrabarty, a young leftist politician from Barishal, a southern division of Bangladesh, has been actively engaged in politics for over a decade. In 2018, she made history as the first woman candidate in the Barishal mayoral election, representing the Socialist Party of Bangladesh. Although she did not win, she garnered significant support from the people of Barishal.
It was unprecedented for a woman to compete against candidates from Bangladesh’s two dominant parties, the AL and BNP. Furthermore, Barishal is a stronghold for Islami Andolon Bangladesh, one of the country’s largest radical political parties.
Monisha acknowledged the challenges faced by her party due to pressure from capitalist groups as they work to establish a socialist society. However, she remains optimistic. “Day by day, people are gaining trust in us. Commodity prices are rising rapidly, and it’s the poor and middle-class people who suffer the most. They need a new system, and as a result, they are joining us in street activism,” she said.
She added, “If we could secure a democratic environment – which is obviously a challenge – the left would grow stronger for the benefit of society.”
In addition, interest in politics is growing among students at private universities, alongside those at public universities. The 2024 uprising has heightened political awareness among youth, and since August 5, political discussions and seminars about the country’s future have drawn packed audiences.
“Students are frustrated with the politics of the AL and BNP, so they warmly welcome leftist ideas on campus,” said Shihab. “Currently, our Bangladesh Students’ Union Private University Unit has 16 executive members from various universities. We also have numerous activist friends across different institutions.”
