The United Nations and the United States are facing serious allegations of orchestrating a regime change in Bangladesh, leading to the removal of Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina’s government and the installation of an interim administration led by Nobel laureate Muhammad Yunus. The political upheaval, which unfolded amid large-scale student protests in mid-2024, has drawn condemnation from the Awami League and its supporters, who claim it was a carefully designed coup aided by international actors, including UN human rights chief Volker Turk.

US President Donald Trump has openly acknowledged that a sum of $29 million was funneled through a dubious company owned by two individuals to “strengthen the political landscape in Bangladesh.” This phrase, according to analysts, is a diplomatic way of admitting that the funds were used to destabilize Hasina’s government and pave the way for an unelected interim administration-something not allowed under the Bangladeshi constitution.

Hasina has alleged that her government’s refusal to grant the US a military base on a southern island angered Washington and led to its push for her removal. Although the US has denied these claims, the financial and diplomatic backing given to opposition movements, as well as its support for Muhammad Yunus, strongly suggest an active role in the transition.

If US funding played a crucial role in mobilizing the so-called student protests, the UN’s actions were even more decisive in ensuring their success. Volker Turk, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, has admitted that his office issued a warning to the Bangladesh Army, threatening to ban it from UN peacekeeping missions if it got involved in suppressing the July-August 2024 student protests. Given that participation in UN peacekeeping operations is both financially lucrative and professionally prestigious for Bangladeshi soldiers and officers, this threat created immense pressure on the military leadership.

As a result, when Prime Minister Hasina called upon the army to restore order amid escalating violence, it refused to act against the protestors. Instead, army chief General Waker-uz-Zaman allegedly pressured Hasina to resign, assuring her safe passage if she stepped down. Three days later, Muhammad Yunus, who had flown back from France, was sworn in as the Chief Advisor of the Interim Government.

Shortly after assuming office, Yunus traveled to the US and acknowledged in a public speech that the student agitation had been “meticulously designed.” He even credited student leader Mahfuz Alam-now part of his advisory council-as a key architect of the movement.

The UN’s bias against the Hasina government was evident long before the 2024 protests. A 2022 report by its Working Group on Enforced Disappearances in Bangladesh was riddled with glaring inaccuracies. It listed Rajkumar Meghen, an Indian secessionist leader from Manipur, as a “disappeared” person in Bangladesh-even though Meghen had completed his prison sentence in India and was living openly in his ancestral home. Similarly, another individual, Keithellakpam Nabachandra, was also falsely listed as “disappeared,” despite being arrested by India’s Border Security Force (BSF) in 2015 and handed over to the Manipur Police for trial.

The Awami League has accused the UN of systematically discrediting Hasina’s government and building a case for her removal. These concerns were reinforced when, in February 2025, the UN Human Rights Office published a fact-finding report covering only the period from July 1 to August 15, 2024, during the height of student protests. The report estimated that around 1,400 people were killed and thousands injured during that time but conveniently ignored the post-Hasina violence that saw systematic attacks on Awami League supporters, police officers, and religious minorities.

Awami League spokesperson Dr. Selim Mahmud has accused the UN of glorifying its role in what he calls a “regime change operation.” He noted that the February report fails to document the atrocities committed after Yunus took power, including mob lynchings, mass arrests, and targeted attacks on Hindu communities. “Respected global media outlets have recorded in detail the wave of murders, rapes, and forced disappearances that have turned Bangladesh into a Republic of Terror,” Mahmud stated.

The UN’s intervention in Bangladesh has drawn international scrutiny, with legal experts questioning the legitimacy of a global body effectively dictating a country’s internal governance. “How can the UN interfere to prevent a national army from aiding its elected government to control civil disorder and pass it off as a victory for human rights?” Mahmud asked, underscoring concerns about the erosion of national sovereignty.

UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres is scheduled to visit Dhaka from March 13-16, 2025, at the invitation of Muhammad Yunus. His visit is expected to focus on Bangladesh’s role in hosting nearly a million Rohingya refugees from Myanmar. However, strong rumors persist in Dhaka that Yunus may use the occasion to consolidate his grip on power.

Reports suggest that Yunus, emboldened by his street power and support from Islamist groups such as Jamaat-e-Islami and Hizb-ut-Tahrir, may push for the resignation of President Shahabuddin Chuppu and General Waker-u-Zaman. Both men are perceived as remnants of the Awami League establishment, and their removal would complete Yunus’ consolidation of power.

The army’s reluctance to act against Yunus’ maneuvers stems from its continued fear of UN sanctions on peacekeeping participation. With Guterres in Dhaka, it is unlikely that military leadership will take strong action to restore constitutional order.

The unfolding crisis raises serious questions about the role of international organizations in shaping domestic politics. The US and UN have long been accused of interfering in sovereign states under the guise of promoting democracy and human rights. In Bangladesh’s case, their actions have led to the removal of a government that was elected with a clear mandate and its replacement by an unelected interim administration.

The implications of this forced transition are profound. It sets a precedent where external forces can manipulate internal politics, using economic pressure, diplomatic threats, and media narratives to engineer regime change. If these tactics go unchallenged, other nations could face similar interventions in the future.

The Awami League has called for an independent inquiry into the legality of the UN’s actions, urging international legal bodies to examine whether the global organization overstepped its mandate. Meanwhile, the people of Bangladesh remain caught in the middle of a political storm, uncertain about the future of their democracy and national sovereignty.

As the situation continues to unfold, one thing is clear: the battle for Bangladesh’s political future is far from over, and the international community will have to reckon with the consequences of its actions.

Please follow Blitz on Google News Channel