At the beginning of the anti-quota student movement, the government ignored it. The Awami League government usually does not pay attention to demands or any movement at any stage in the beginning. They have faced various movements during their four consecutive terms in power, but they did not pay attention to any movement in the beginning. After trying to thwart the movement in various ways, they stopped all the movements by using force. The student movement on quota also fell into this continuity at one point.
At first, the movement was suppressed by the Chhatra League, but the results were reversed. Chhatra League was beaten, forced to leave the campus. It became a spark when the police quelled the movement. Instead of being afraid of the police baton-gun, the chest allowed it with indomitable courage. The police fired, but did not move despite the threat of more fire. The police fired again. Rangpur Begum Rokeya University student Abu Sayed sacrificed his life in this way. The sacrifice of his life did not break the spirit of the protesting students. In addition, the fear of death in one death is gone for everyone else. Gun-stick-bayonet-tear gas has become insignificant. The government has moved towards using more force to control the situation. BGB was called in, later the army.
Various educational institutions have been closed by official orders. Students were kicked out of the campus by trickery and force. But still the movement did not stop. Rather, the campus movement has spread across the country. Common people also united with the demands of the students. Many have taken to the streets. Various forces including Police-RAB-BGB have faced the collective resistance of the students.
This is not the first time Awami League has fallen in front of this tremendous form of student power. In 2018, after two movements, it retreated. The anti-quota movement forced the government to cancel the quota system. Students also won another movement in the same year demanding road safety. It is worth noting that this time the quota movement was started by those who developed the road safety movement by their hands. They were secondary school students then. This time they are at the university.
The government did not agree with the movement and the demand to cancel the quota this time. Rather, the 2018 circular issued by the government was quashed by the High Court, and due to the quashing of the circular, the quota system came back. Although the government abolished the quota six years ago in the face of agitation, the government remained in favor of the abolition of the quota despite a different judgment of the High Court. The appeal against the judgment of the High Court is proof of that. Then the students did not care at first when they started the movement. As a result, the matter remained pending until the appeal. There was no special initiative of the state side to bring forward the hearing. However, as the agitation continued to grow, the Appellate Division stayed the High Court's judgment, and set aside a month's wait for a full hearing. Then when the situation got out of hand, the initiative was taken to bring forward the appeal and the actual final judgment at the last Full Court hearing. The Appellate Division in the final verdict ruled by keeping 7 percent quota.
The government's role before the final verdict was controversial. As the Prime Minister's speech brought up the issue of giving priority to the grandchildren of the brave freedom fighters, the agitators thought that the quota was back. Where there is no list of Razakar in the country, it is natural to doubt the intentions of the journalists who raised the question about Razakar's granddaughter. The most discussed issue among the quota agitators was the 30 percent freedom fighter quota. In this opportunity, many people did not miss the opportunity to insult the brave freedom fighters of 1971. Many questioned the purpose of their participation in the liberation war. Freedom fighters get many benefits from the state, why their children and grandchildren will get special benefits in terms of employment, raised the question.
As the leading party of the liberation war, the Awami League and the government saw the issue as a battle of egos, so there was a faint voice to bring back the quota. Although the issue was not official, the Prime Minister's statement and the statements of various ministers raised doubts. As a result, the students became angry with the indication of the return of quota.
The Awami League government took this student movement lightly, and thought that it could be thwarted by the BCL and the police. Obaidul Quader's various speeches showed this ambition of theirs. He said that the Chhatra League will look into the issue of the agitators, which has spread anger among the agitators. He then told the party leaders to deal with the matter politically and ordered them to form a ward-by-ward resistance. He commented that BNP-Jamaat has entered the students' movement. Ignoring the student-power, his statements and instructions added fuel to the fire.
Ignoring student power comes largely from the recent history of countering anti-government movements. Ahead of the 12th National Assembly elections, the government ignored all anti-government political forces, including the BNP-Jamaat, despite their exclusion. Before that election, many foreign powers, including the United States and the European Union, took a stand against the government, but in the end elected the government and formed the government again. As the government takes this path of confronting the opposing political forces, egoism has arisen in them, a mentality of not caring about any power has developed. This mindset has been adopted by seeing the student movement in the same way.
The government thought by Executive orders students can also be suppressed by threatening the police by closing the educational institutions and vacating the campus. But due to the closure of educational institutions, the movement spread from the campus to the entire country. Students of private universities also declared solidarity with the movement of public universities. Along with all university students, school-college students also came down on the streets. The student movement took the form of a student uprising.
Although the control of the movement was not ultimately in the hands of the students, if it had been resolved in time, there would have been no loss of lives and loss of public and private resources, and the country would not have suffered in many ways, including economically. The uncontrolled, unstable and abnormal situation going on in the country could not have happened if the right decision was taken at the time.
The allegation that the Awami League in power does not care about anyone has been proven once again during this student movement. He failed to give the proper guidance that was needed from the party's general secretary Obaidul Quader. Awami League as a party and the state have to pay the price. An ordinary student is now pointing fingers at the opposing political forces in such a dangerous form of agitation. They may be involved in sabotage, but can the responsibility of the Awami League government be denied for bringing this movement to that stage? As the Awami League leadership is now focusing on the politics of responsibility-impression, on the one hand, the organizational crisis is being hidden; on the other hand, the issue of the government's failure to control the situation is also being hidden.
No matter how angry the students are, at least they won't engage in sabotage. Not to set fire to KPI areas, not to damage metro rails, not to attack television buildings, not to engage in night clashes, not to attack prisons and loot arsenals and rob prisoners; There will be someone else. The government could not prevent them; neither politically nor administratively. Although they deny responsibility for this failure, it is not a matter of denial. Now the information about damage to state assets is coming forward, the government is showing interest here. Evidence of damage to ambassadors and diplomats of various countries is being shown. Does it hide the huge loss of life? But just as the responsibility of the government is to safeguard the state assets, it is also the responsibility to ensure the safety of the lives and property of its citizens.
The student-power should not have been ignored as this movement proved to have lost control of the government at one stage. However, there is a fear that the government will sit down to think about it again - we did not lose in the end! The noise started to rise. A police officer emphasized this. Now when others start to say, the context of winning and losing in the game of power will be determined and established!