Winning the battle vs the war

As the world watched, in the spring of 2003, when then-Major General David Petraeus led the 101st Airborne Division into Baghdad, he sent out a historic radio call. His words were not about a victory lap but about the massive, uncharted territory that lay ahead: rebuilding and stabilizing a shattered city. Immediately, a question arises, “Now that we have Baghdad, what now? Tell me how this ends”. This was an enduring reflection of the complexities of warfare—and governance.

The strategic philosophy of Petraeus was all about big ideas-clear, overarching goals that guided action. Big ideas were complemented by a profusion of small ideas-tactical steps, adaptable, responsive to ground realities. For Petraeus, the capture of Baghdad was only a battle; the war was about re-institutionalizing, stabilizing, and gaining the confidence of a torn-apart population.

The dynamics of the transition in Bangladesh after Hasina have been such. Ousting an authoritarian regime is a monumental task, but as history has shown, revolutions do not stumble on their ideals but in their inability to transform visions into sustainable action. Herein lies the rub-to win the war, Bangladesh has to embrace its own “big ideas” while creating smaller, cohesive actions that reinforce these principles.

Why a Military Parallel: Mention of military doctrine in a political column invites skepticism. Is it right to liken the aftermath of a military campaign to a political transition? The answer lies in the cold reality that Bangladesh faces. The fall of Sheikh Hasina’s regime was not exactly a political changeover; as a matter of fact, it was a battle of liberation fought on the streets with unarmed citizens pitted against a state machinery that acted more like an occupying force armed to the teeth.

Consider the figures below: more than 19,000 injured, thousands mutilated for life, and over 1,500 lives lost-just in less than three weeks. The July revolution killed an average of 75 civilian lives daily. Let’s put that into perspective, the daily death toll of Bangladesh in those 20 days are 44 less daily “civilian” death than that of Gaza since Oct, 7; 35 less daily “military” death in Ukraine since Russia started the war on Ukraine and 71 more daily civilian death since the Junta took-over in Myanmar in February 2021 to till date. It was a war in which aggressors wore state uniforms, and defenders were unarmed civilians fighting for their democratic future.

By using these military analogies, we are again reminded of the scale of this transformation that needs to be effective. For Bangladesh to rise from the ashes, it needs to incorporate the discipline, foresight, and flexibility that Petraeus mentioned in Iraq. The “war” here is not against a foreign adversary but against institutional decay, entrenched inequities, and the vestiges of authoritarianism.

The Unarmed Victors: The state forces, during the regime of Sheikh Hasina, became so brutal that it became incomprehensible. Even three-year-old children became victims of bullets from those who were meant to protect them. Helicopters patrolled above the cities as if it were wartime, while Armored Personnel Carriers and ambush-protected vehicles roamed through the streets, causing fear. Automatic submachine guns and snipers targeted the unarmed civilians. Sound grenades pierced the night, leaving neighborhoods overwhelmed with terror.

No age, gender or belief system granted immunity. The injured and the dead were strewn about like garbage-thrown from the tops of state vehicles, left in the canals, or on the flyovers. Day-and-night block search operations, en-masse abductions and unspeakable torture-all that had become routine. The psychological trauma has been deep, and this collective trauma is palpable, particularly amongst the youth. Bangladesh was not merely under an authoritarian clutches; it was under siege.

If this is not a warzone, then the definition itself needs a revisit. There was, however, an immediate and striking juxtaposition between revolutionaries and regular combatants: Bangladesh’s defenders were unarmed, armed with nothing but courage. They used rap songs to lift their spirits, devised communication systems that worked around internet blackouts, and carried injured comrades to safety amidst continuous fire. They rose up against tyranny-where bullets rained.

These forces, unarmed, did much more than resist. When the dust settled, they were the architects of order. They guarded their neighborhoods, they guarded the temples of minority communities, kept civility alive amidst chaos. The crowning act of resilience was to nominate Dr Muhammad Yunus to head an interim government - a cool-headed decision to ensure that the revolution would not degenerate into further bloodshed.

The youth of Bangladesh taught the world that strength does not lie in weapons but in unity, resilience, and vision. It was not a demonstration of bravery alone but an assertion that they were fighting for more than an election; they were fighting for an idea.

Winning the Battle, Risking the War: A hundred days into Yunus’s caretaker government, cautious optimism is in the air. His leadership has hence been the silver lining, affording the country a breathing space. At this turning point, however, we at the Institute of Strategy & Tactics Research Corporation —a think-tank assembly of experts from various fields concerning political strategy, military operations, intelligence, economics, and geopolitics—believes the following to be a more pertinent question: What did this revolution achieve? Was it only about holding elections or was it the start of something more transformative?

Answer isn’t very hard, the revolutionaries sacrificed not for an election, but for systemic transformation. They fought for a nation that upholds democracy, justice, equity & human rights as the cornerstone of the new Bangladesh, which is the big idea. The interim government has a responsibility to honor that sacrifice—not just in words, but in actions.

General Petraeus’s question- “Now what?”—resonates in Dhaka today. The answer lies in understanding that the battle may have been won, but the war is far from over. And winning that war will depend not on grand declarations, but on the discipline to execute smaller ideas with precision, urgency, and resolve.

Building on the Common Strength, Gradually Working Out the Weaknesses: The success of the revolution lay in its collective strength; however, one of the first cracks to appear is the fragmentation among political parties and civil groups. Many are now clamoring for elections, and while their demands are legitimate, elections without systemic reforms risk bringing the tyranny back under a different guise. The interim government cannot do this alone, nor should it.

There is a path forward: build platforms, not just committees—tangible spaces where parties, grassroots organisations, and civil society can contribute to the reform process. This isn’t just about efficiency; it’s about showing the world that democracy isn’t just a word—it’s a practice. Sharing responsibility builds resilience, and resilience is what Bangladesh needs now more than ever.

The platforms mean providing a venue for inclusive dialogue where the reforms will be an act of the people’s will. Sharing responsibility with political parties doesn’t undermine the strength of control of the interim government but strengthens it.

Except for a few controversial ones, the advisory board is the potential home of the finest minds of the nation. However, these members lack grassroots connections in communicating with and inspiring the masses. The interim government could use the network of political parties and outreach to transform the intellectual strength into actionable policies that resonate with ordinary citizens.

So, instead of confronting each other as rivals, converging based on the shared values would be much more viable option. Working as platform and ensuring inclusivity for all will create the space for government, political parties and everyone who has common goal towards a Bangladesh that will be immune to such tyrannical regime.

This can also become the acid test ground for the political parties to prove whether they’re ready for the Bangladesh that our own kids laid down their lives for.

Protecting Revolutionaries: The revolutionaries who fought to oust Sheikh Hasina are more than participants in a movement—they are its backbone. Yet, they now face targeted propaganda campaigns labeling them as extremists. This narrative, left unchecked, threatens to undermine their sacrifices and delegitimise the revolution itself.

Field Marshall Sam Manekshaw once told Indira Gandhi that while it was his duty to protect the nation from external enemies, it was her duty to protect him and the army from internal threats. Bangladesh’s interim government must adopt a similar philosophy: protect the revolutionaries, both from external adversaries and internal apathy.

This protection goes beyond countering propaganda. Many of the injured revolutionaries still have not been given proper medical care and obvious scars from neglect remain. Treating these issues is thus a moral as well as strategic imperative. Ensuring their well-being will strengthen public trust in the government by proving that the values of justice and equality for which the revolution took place are being upheld.

Economic Crisis: One of the major challenges ahead of the interim government is the way it would address the economic fallouts of years of mismanagement under the Hasina regime. There is no doubt that an economy bruised through corruption, cronyism, and unsustainable debt needs a bold and immediate response. But bold does not mean reckless. Lessons from previous transitional governments, such as the 2007-08 caretaker government, would caution against draconian measures that can break the economic backbone and create “mafiaism” in essential sectors.

The emphasis must shift toward community-led growth. This kind of growth can achieve a bottom-up productivity surge and rise in employment by empowering small farmers, startups, and youth-led enterprises. Programs on microloans, skill development, and access to markets will not only stabilise livelihoods but rebuild trust in governance. At the same time, interim government policies must not slip into the trap that lies at the heart of monopoly and systemic exploitation-favouring large corporations at the expense of local entrepreneurs.

It should be backed up by a selective anti-corruption drive to recover the looted public money of the Hasina years, which must be invested in healthcare, education, and infrastructure, those fields of public service that touch the skin and bones of common people.

Anybody Who Puts Our Kids in Danger, Doesn’t Get a Second Chance, Period: Justice is the premise on which the future of post-revolution Bangladesh is to be based. The atrocities committed upon its people by the regime of Sheikh Hasina, three-year-old children losing their lives, families torn apart, communities shattered-demand nothing less than absolute accountability. No compromise, no margin for leniency. Whoever has endangered our children, destroyed lives, and betrayed the oath to protect will have to face the full weight of justice.

Justice is not just about retribution; it is a moral obligation to heal the wound and a strong message: tyranny in any form shall never be left unpunished. Not for revenge, so that the future generation shall inherit a nation wherein the rule of law is mightier than the rule of fear. Those who designed these crimes, whether as masterminds or collaborators, must be held accountable through clear judicial procedures that express the spirit of the revolution.

It is left to the interim government to ensure with decisive actions that no violator, whatever high ranking in position and power, can get away with it. Justice should be swift, without bias, and absolute to set up a civilization where such heinous atrocities are unimaginable.

Security Forces Overhaul - Breaking Trauma and Corruption Cycles: The interim government of Bangladesh has to grapple with few greater challenges than rebuilding trust in the country’s security forces. A security apparatus used for decades not to protect but to suppress, the people, leaves deep scars. One elderly woman spoke with quiet anguish: “Baba, I don’t feel like working here anymore, the policeman who killed my son shot him in the chest several times during the revolution; he still serves in the police station. I cannot take the burden and I am going back to my village.”

In her words, she articulates a national wound: for every weeping mother. The security forces personnel that were part of the killings, their kids are at school, humiliated because their parent is labeled a killer; families shunned because of their association with a tainted force. This circle of shame and trauma eats away at the very building blocks of society. And so, to rebuild, Bangladesh must break down its internal security forces to a wholesale reforging that would ensure its mandate is one of serving and protecting, not intimidating and terrorizing.

This reform must start with an arduous process of vetting and accountability. All officers and officials who were complicit in human rights abuses need to be removed and brought to justice. Simultaneously, mechanisms need to be installed to protect those who upheld their duty and restore honor to their profession. The security forces should be retrained under new codes of conduct with an emphasis on human rights, community engagement, and democratic principles. In this way, justice is not only done but the innocent members of the security forces and their relatives are also saved from public backlash.

Transparency must be ensured. Publicly accessible tribunals, civilian oversight committees, and international collaboration can ensure that this reform is credible and enduring. Only by transforming its security apparatus can Bangladesh break free from the cycles of fear and corruption that have plagued its past. [To be continued]

Lt. (Retd.) Abu Rushd is the Editor in Chief of Bangladesh Defence Journal & Director- Defence & Intelligence at Institute of Strategy and Tactics Research (ISTR). M. Zakir Hossain Khan is Chief Executive of Change Initiative and Director-Nature & Integrity at ISTR. Salman Chowdhury is the Head of External Affairs at Bangladesh Defence Journal and Director- National Security & External Affairs at ISTR. [email protected]