---

Eight months after BNP returned to power, the general mood in Bangladesh seems to be shifting away from euphoria. The relief of securing an elected government’s return following the fall of the Awami League government is giving way to a tougher question: is the country being run differently, or are different people simply running it?

This question has much to do with the expectations created by the 2024 uprising. People did not endure so much suffering just to see new faces in familiar seats of power. They wanted institutions that can stand up to politicians, police that are accountable to the law rather than party offices, and a government that listens even when it is being criticised.

There is some good news. The elected government has brought back a measure of stability after years of disruption. Parliament is back in session, the executive authority has a democratic mandate, and the country has regained something it badly needed: a sense of political direction. None of that should be dismissed.

Prime Minister Tarique Rahman himself has been different in certain ways. His relatively modest public manner, resistance to unnecessary privileges, and willingness to bring new faces into government are welcome. In a political culture that often confuses authority with grandeur, even small changes in tone can matter.

But tone is not the same as change. A prime minister can reject excessive protocol while an ordinary citizen still needs political contact to get work done at a government office. The real test is what happens away from the cameras, where people encounter the state in everyday life.

Some of the government’s social initiatives deserve fair hearing. The Family Card and Farmer Card programmes could genuinely relieve households under pressure. Canal restoration and agricultural support are also practical priorities in a country where political debate too often obscures rural livelihoods. What matters now is who benefits. Are people selected because they need help, or because they know someone? Are these programmes financially sustainable and properly monitored? If assistance becomes another form of political favour, a promising initiative will have been wasted.

The economy gives the government little room for comfort. It inherited weak banks, stubborn inflation, sluggish investment, and tight public finances. Nobody should expect those problems to disappear in eight months. Still, the scale of the challenge demands more urgency than the public has seen so far. September inflation reached 8.34 percent. The World Bank projects growth of only 3.4 percent for FY2026 and FY2027, alongside worrying signs of rising poverty, weak employment, and banking sector instability.

These figures may sound abstract, but their consequences are painfully familiar: families cutting back on groceries, graduates searching endlessly for decent jobs, and small business owners postponing expansion because the future looks uncertain. People need to see and experience the fruits of political stability in everyday life. They need a believable plan to restore confidence, repair the banking system, secure energy supplies, and create jobs. More importantly, they need evidence that the plan is working.

Law and order are an even more immediate test. Allegations of extortion, land grabbing, intimidation, and violence involving people connected to the ruling party have not disappeared. The BNP has disciplined some members, and that is better than ignoring the problem. But expelling someone from a party does not settle a criminal complaint. If the law genuinely applies to everyone, investigations and prosecutions must follow the evidence, regardless of political connections. Otherwise, people will understandably wonder what has changed beyond the party flags.

The attacks on journalists as reported in recent months are equally troubling. A party that benefited from demands for democratic freedom should understand why a critical press matters as well as the importance of taking measures to ensure that it not only survives but also flourishes. Democracy means allowing people to question those in power, even when their questions are uncomfortable.

Then there is the question of political reform. Let us set aside the persistent disputes over the July Charter and referendum for a moment. What about BNP’s own 31-point reform agenda and the promises made in its election manifesto? The party pledged to limit the concentration of power, strengthen democratic institutions, ensure judicial independence, and make the government more accountable. These were not demands imposed by its opponents; they were commitments BNP itself made to the people. Now that it holds power, the question is simple: how much of its own reform agenda is it genuinely prepared to implement? Surely, the public has every right to expect the party to honour its own promises.

Parliament must be able to scrutinise the executive, courts must remain independent, and elections, including local government polls, must be free, credible and, of course, violence-free. These should be common democratic commitments, not bargaining chips in a contest between political parties or other prevailing forces.

On foreign policy, it has been a mixed bag so far. Closer engagement with China, Japan, and other international partners makes sense, but the India question seems to remain as unresolved as during the interim government’s tenure. Diplomacy, however, should ultimately be judged by the investment, trade opportunities and jobs it brings home, not the number of meetings held or agreements announced. So where does that leave the government?

The PM has shown an understanding of the public mood. There is greater stability, a less extravagant leadership style, and some useful policy initiatives. Yet the old problems—political influence, public insecurity, economic anxiety, and institutional weakness—remain close to the surface.

Eight months is too soon for a final verdict. But it is long enough to see what a government tolerates, what it challenges and what it is genuinely prepared to change. Bangladesh has had powerful prime ministers before. What it has lacked are institutions strong enough to restrain them. That is the lesson its political history keeps teaching, often at a heavy price.

PM Tarique Rahman’s greatest achievement would not be to become another powerful prime minister. It would be to build a system where no prime minister, including himself, could exercise power without effective oversight and accountability. That would be a legacy worth remembering, and a change Bangladesh could finally believe in.

Zillur Rahman is a political analyst and President of the Centre for Governance Studies (CGS). He hosts Tritiyo Matra on Channel i and writes on geopolitics, strategic affairs and governance. Follow him on X: @zillur.

This article published on the Daily Star 
Views in this article are author’s own and do not necessarily reflect CGS policy.