Throughout Bangladesh’s history and into the present, student- and youth-led movements have spearheaded efforts to influence political change. Examples like the 1969 revolt against Pakistani president Ayub Khan before independence or the 1980s protests that lead to the fall of military dictator Hussain Mohammad Ershad in 1990 demonstrate the Bangladeshi people’s evident commitment to democracy. Unfortunately, these campaigns failed to create lasting democratic stability. Throughout Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina’s recent 15-year rule, Bangladesh gradually fell into a process of democratic backsliding marked by human rights violations, violent suppression of free speech, and contested elections. In July 2024, a new wave of student-led protests against the quota system succeeded in toppling Hasina’s regime. Through strategic mobilization efforts involving social media and lessons from history, student leaders were able to disrupt the status quo in a way that past movements could not. 

Already, their movement is being lauded as the start of a new era of democratic reform in Bangladesh, but what makes the prospective outcome of this current movement different from those of the past? In an unprecedented move, student leaders were appointed to an advisory council for the new interim government, placing them in a unique position to continue in their fight for democratic change. Involvement of young people in this new government is a distinguishing factor that will contribute to the creation of a stronger, long-term democracy in Bangladesh. 

In examining the quality of life for many educated young people in Bangladesh throughout Hasina’s rule, it makes sense that they would lead efforts to challenge the system. While Hasina oversaw a period of rapid economic growth for Bangladesh, the progress only manifested in exports and foreign investments; it did not extend to the middle- and working-class. Particularly affected were college-educated citizens under 30 who struggled to find secure jobs. Almost 40% of those aged 15-29 were labeled as NEET (“not in employment, education or training”) in 2023, and college graduates suffered higher unemployment rates than their counterparts without a degree. Much of their struggle to obtain employment can be attributed to the patronage system that rewarded those loyal to Hasina’s ruling party, the Awami League (AL). Originally established as a way to reward liberation fighters in the war for independence, the quota system became an avenue for Hasina and the AL to consolidate power by placing loyalists in positions of influence. Due to their anger over their lack of economic opportunity and over the manner in which they had witnessed the government consistently and fervently repressing political dissent, it is no surprise that students in Bangladesh would want to call for change. 

While deep passion for their cause represents a similarity between these student leaders and their predecessors, the strategies for achieving their goals were different. Their effective use of social media to mobilize support (prior to the internet shutdown) and their ability to learn from the shortcomings of previous movements played an important role. However, the principle distinction is how they combined their protest against the quota system with working-class issues to create a movement that spurred millions of people across the country to demand democratic reform. According to Bangladeshi attorney and professor of law Chaumtoli Huq, “People were united by economic discontent and a larger fight against a fascist government, especially after seeing the escalating egregious and violent state repression against the protestors.” Thus, when protestors stormed Hasina’s residence on August 5, 2024 and caused her to resign, it was an effort championed by vast numbers of people. Again, the Bangladeshi people displayed a desire for democracy.

The initial triumph of the student-led movement was enough to send a message of hope to the people of Bangladesh and those watching from around the world. Could Hasina’s resignation and departure to India usher in an era of lasting democracy for Bangladesh? If student involvement in the movement had stopped after that victory, the answer would likely have been no. Bolstered by the support of Bangladeshi people from all levels of society, the student leaders were able to step into influential roles and make decisions about the path going forward. On a local level, student and youth organizers maintained order in the absence of a police force – who feared retribution for their enforcement of Hasina’s “shoot on sight” order during the protests. On a national level, their choice for leader of the interim government (Nobel Peace Laureate Mohammad Yunis) was accepted without resistance. Crucially, two student leaders from Dhaka University were appointed to the cabinet of the interim government. In a country where only 0.29% of parliamentarians were under 30 in 2022, this development represented a sharp distinction from outcomes of historical movements for democracy. These student leaders will have a say in the restructuring of Bangladesh’s democratic institutions. They will have the power to reinforce their demands.

Arguing that representation of young people in Bangladesh’s new government will help lay the foundation for a lasting democracy is a tricky argument to make, especially when viewed in the context of student-led movements in other countries. Examining the role of the 1974 Soweto Uprising led by South African youth in ending apartheid illustrates the impact of a student-led movement in creating change; however, it also reveals the limits of protests in creating long-term satisfaction with democracy. Young South Africans today feel disengaged and powerless in the realm of politics. They feel that the government does not represent their interests or work to combat issues that affect them. Historical student-led movements in Bangladesh ultimately produced a similar frustration with the government, but the situation today is different. Unlike in South Africa, young people in Bangladesh have been given a seat at the table. Furthermore, this seat at the table is not just an opportunity to participate in the existing system; it is a chance to be involved in the reformation of critical democratic institutions. 

It must be acknowledged that increased influence of young people in Bangladesh’s government will not create a lasting democracy on its own. It is one of many necessary but not sufficient conditions for democratic consolidation. The claim that it is necessary is inspired by the eighth of Dahl’s requirements for democracy: “Institutions for making government policies depend on votes and other expressions of preference.” By recognizing the student protestors as leaders, the Bangladeshi people have expressed a preference for how they would like their institutions to be structured. The input of young people is clearly being prioritized in the current political climate of Bangladesh. Thus, their inclusion is necessary for carrying out the will of a people who desire the growth of a strong democracy. As major proponents of democracy themselves, these students are uniquely positioned to help reform Bangladesh’s democratic institutions.

While the future is yet to be seen, the unprecedented involvement of young people in the restructuring of the Bangladesh government can facilitate the process of creating lasting democratic change. It is unlikely that this movement will join the ranks of past protests that could not create lasting democratic strength because these student leaders will have a say. With their influence, Bangladesh’s democracy has the opportunity to achieve stability even after the cries of protest fade from the streets.