- By C. Raja Mohan
In the wake of Sheikh Hasina’s ouster in Bangladesh, various theories have emerged in the Indian media. One of the most notable suggests that 84-year-old economist Muhammad Yunus, often rumored to be a “CIA agent,” played a pivotal role in toppling the Awami League, effectively diminishing India’s influence in Bangladeshi politics.
But how credible is this theory?
Conspiracy theories have long been a popular narrative in the subcontinent, thriving on speculation rather than evidence and often immune to refutation. Historically, South Asian leaders have turned to the “foreign hand” theory whenever facing internal crises.
In the latter half of the 20th century, conspiracy theories were central to Indian politics. Indira Gandhi, during her authoritarian rule, frequently blamed external powers, particularly the CIA, whenever she encountered political resistance. During the Emergency in 1975, Gandhi and her leftist allies accused domestic “fascists” and foreign “imperialists” of attempting to overthrow her “progressive” government.
Some might argue that today’s “rising India” is more confident and less inclined to blame external forces for every unexpected event. However, the recent loss of a “friend” in Dhaka appears to have unsettled Delhi’s political establishment.
It’s important to recognize that conspiracy theories can foster a toxic political culture, discouraging rational analysis and obscuring the real causes of political upheaval.
One doesn’t need to be a geopolitical expert to see that Sheikh Hasina’s popularity was waning. Her centralization of power, repeated election manipulations, and increasing authoritarianism, coupled with post-COVID economic challenges, had fueled widespread discontent in Bangladesh. The anti-quota student movement ultimately ignited this volatile situation, turning a non-political protest into a political tipping point.
Now, Hasina clings to conspiracy theories, a response that might evoke some sympathy. She may be in the early stages of grappling with the grief of losing power and the shame of being rejected by her people.
Hasina believes the United States orchestrated her downfall because she refused to allow a U.S. military base in Bangladesh.
She is not the only South Asian leader to have pointed fingers at the U.S. after losing power. In April 2022, after being ousted through a no-confidence vote, Pakistan’s Imran Khan also accused the U.S. of orchestrating his removal for similar reasons.
It’s true that the U.S. seeks military bases and facilities in the region to counter China’s growing influence. However, to suggest that the U.S. is staging coups in Bangladesh and Pakistan solely to secure these bases is an exaggeration.
But conspiracy theories do not need evidence to gain traction. Such theories often give undue credit to the CIA’s capabilities. In reality, the myth of CIA omnipotence in South Asia far exceeds its actual power. Consider that despite significant efforts, the CIA has failed to unseat Venezuela’s widely condemned President Nicolás Maduro, and for over 60 years, the U.S. has been unable to overthrow the communist regime in Cuba, a country practically in America’s backyard.
In recent years, India’s intelligence agency, the Research and Analysis Wing (RAW), has also become a scapegoat for regime changes in the region, particularly in South Asia.
Whether knowingly or not, conspiracy theorists who blame “foreign hands” for regime changes often implicate the Indian establishment in intelligence failures.
Given Bangladesh’s proximity to India and the historically close ties between the two countries, accusing the CIA of orchestrating a coup in Bangladesh implicitly suggests that Delhi was unaware of critical developments in its immediate neighbor.
India must conduct a serious “post-mortem” of its oversight in Bangladesh’s current crisis. This analysis would yield valuable lessons for India’s regional policy.
No power, whether global or regional, can monopolize control over another nation’s political landscape. Moreover, no government, no matter how resource-rich, is immune to the risks of misinterpreting on-the-ground realities in foreign nations.
The story of Hasina’s fall is both one of triumph and tragedy. She survived numerous challenges and preserved the trajectory of her nation’s liberation from Pakistan. Over the past 15 years, she transformed Bangladesh into a rapidly growing economy, making it a model for other developing countries, including Pakistan.
Hasina also helped resolve longstanding issues between India and Bangladesh, such as border disputes, cross-border terrorism, and fostering regional trade and connectivity. However, like all tragic heroes, Hasina had her fatal flaws—chief among them was her unyielding drive to centralize power and her failure to heal the deep political divisions over nationalism and history in her country.
Even if Hasina meets a tragic end to her political career, she will remain a significant historical figure in the modern evolution of the subcontinent.
India has many reasons to regret Hasina’s ouster, but it should not remain fixated on the events of the past few days.
Delhi must support Dhaka’s new government in building upon the strong foundation of bilateral strategic partnership that Hasina established.
The new student movement in Bangladesh seeks political liberalization and greater economic opportunities. Delhi should extend a message of sympathy toward the movement.
Given the likelihood that the U.S. will play a significant role in restoring stability and ensuring long-term progress in Bangladesh, India must view the U.S. as a key partner. In recent years, Delhi and Washington have grown closer on South Asian issues. Over the past few months, both countries have worked to align their views on Bangladesh.
Recall that Prime Minister Narendra Modi introduced Sheikh Hasina to President Joe Biden at the G20 summit in Delhi and requested Washington to ease political pressure on Dhaka.
Despite the many questions surrounding the January elections in Bangladesh, the Biden administration had pledged support for Hasina’s new government.
Ultimately, the crisis in Bangladesh was not driven by any discord between Delhi and Washington. The root cause was Hasina’s growing disconnect with the Bangladeshi people.
C. Raja Mohan is a visiting professor at the Institute of South Asian Studies at the National University of Singapore and the International Affairs Editor at The Indian Express.
