The interim government has not limited itself to the United States. It has launched unnecessary and highly ambitious initiatives with other countries as well.

On 13 June 2024, Bangladesh’s current interim government, led by Dr Yunus, signed an NDA agreement with the United States. The explanation was a familiar one: urgency, and the need to reduce “reciprocal taxes” imposed under the Donald Trump administration. But the way it was done matters as much as what was done. The agreement was rushed through without meaningful consultation with relevant stakeholders. And because it was a Non-Disclosure Agreement, the public had no way to know what was promised, traded, or quietly conceded.

The government kept repeating one line: nothing in the deal goes against national interest. Yet it never answered the obvious follow-up. If there was nothing to hide, why was the public denied the right to see it? Later, when a draft leaked from Bangladesh’s National Board of Revenue, the government’s claim, collapsed on contact with the text. This 20-page NDA did not read like a harmless confidentiality instrument. Page after page, Bangladesh’s interests were weakened. The authority to make decisions linked to national security, the economy, natural resources, and foreign relations was, in effect, handed over to a foreign state.

At the time the NDA was signed, media reports said the agreement included a plan to buy 25 Boeing aircraft and import wheat from the United States. Then, in August, Commerce Adviser Sheikh Bashir Uddin claimed that during discussions with US officials, they did not seem serious about selling Boeing aircraft. Biman Bangladesh Airlines, too, said it was not aware of any Boeing purchase plan. And yet, within just four months, Biman finalised a decision to buy 14 Boeing aircraft. That decision was taken at Biman’s board meeting on 30 December 2025.

Under Yunus’s interim government, work is now underway to finalise this massive unnecessary procurement, valued at 37,000 crore TK, roughly 3 billion dollars. To speed up the process, on 27 August 2025, Commerce Adviser Sheikh Bashir Uddin was appointed Chairman of Biman. Then, on 14 January, Security Adviser Khalilur Rahman, Yunus’s Special Assistant Faiz Ahmed Taiyeb (serving with the rank of State Minister), and Akhtar Ahmed, Senior Secretary of the Election Commission Secretariat, were appointed to Biman’s board. Each is widely known as close to Dr Yunus. The interim government has also finalised a decision to buy Black Hawk helicopters from the United States for the armed forces.

In July 2025, the interim government signed an MoU with the US Wheat Exporters Association to import wheat from the United States. Under this agreement, Bangladesh will import 3.5 million tonnes of US wheat over five years. The contract set the price at 308 dollars per tonne, with a note that the price may be adjusted over time. But wheat is currently available on the international market at 226–230 dollars per tonne. Already, under this arrangement, Bangladesh has imported 220,000 tonnes in three batches. Importing at inflated prices will raise the price of flour in the open market. That increase will spread quickly across food prices. The cost will land on ordinary people.

On 12 August 2025, the interim government approved a decision to purchase two bulk carrier ships from the United States, from Hellenic Dry Bulk Ventures LLC, for nearly 1,000 crore taka. The oddity is glaring: the United States is not even among the world’s top ten shipbuilding and ship-exporting countries, yet Bangladesh is buying at prices well above market rates. And then comes the detail that makes the whole thing feel like a bad joke: both ships will be built in China. In other words, Chinese-made ships are being purchased not from China, but through the United States, at a higher price.

The interim government has also signed a 15-year LNG purchase agreement with Excelerate Energy worth around 1 lakh crore taka (8.5 billion dollars). Under the Awami League government, Bangladesh had signed a preliminary agreement with Excelerate Energy in November 2023. Before that, Bangladesh imported LNG at competitive prices through long-term deals with Qatar Energy (signed in 2017) and OQ Trading Limited, Oman (signed in 2018). The stated idea behind Excelerate was competition, with supplies expected to begin from 2026.

But after the fall of the Awami League government on 5 August 2024, Excelerate Energy intensified its efforts to expand in Bangladesh. In September, Bangladesh-focused former US ambassador Peter D Haas left the US State Department and joined Excelerate as a Strategic Advisor. In October, Excelerate’s CEO Steven M Kobos flew to Bangladesh to meet Dr Yunus. After that effective single control of LNG exports to Bangladesh moved into Excelerate’s hands. Under the interim government’s revised agreement, the price of gas purchased from Excelerate is set at 15.69 dollars per MMBtu, at least 2.5 dollars higher than the spot market. In April 2024, Bangladesh purchased LNG from the spot market at 9.5–9.93 dollars.

On 30 December, the interim government decided to buy short-term LNG from Switzerland-based SOCAR Trading S.A. Although the office is in Switzerland, it is essentially the commercial arm of SOCAR, the state oil and gas company of Azerbaijan. Notably, on 7 December, Azerbaijan’s president’s two daughters, Leyla Aliyeva and Arzu Aliyeva, visited Bangladesh and met Dr Yunus. It was Dr Yunus’s personal intervention that drove the decision to purchase LNG from the controversial SOCAR-linked company.

The interim government has not limited itself to the United States. It has launched unnecessary and highly ambitious initiatives with other countries as well. These include plans to buy JF-17 Thunder fighter jets from Pakistan, purchase Eurofighter Typhoon jets from a European consortium, establish a drone factory under a G2G agreement with China and buy J-10CE fighter jets, purchase submarines from South Korea, buy T-129 ATAK helicopters from Turkey, and sign a defence agreement with Japan.

Then there is the question of ports and terminals, where decisions today can lock a country into dependencies for decades. In November, the interim government signed a 33-year agreement with APM Terminals to build and operate the Laldiya Terminal at Chattogram Patenga. The Chattogram Port’s New Mooring Container Terminal is being handed over for 30 years to UAE-based DP World. And the Pangaon inland water terminal near Dhaka has been leased for 22 years to Switzerland’s Medlog S.A..

Put all of this together and a picture forms. Dr Yunus has seized control of Bangladesh’s governing authority and, used it in two directions at once: to serve personal interests, and to satisfy those who “employ” him by pushing through agreement after agreement that runs against the country and the state. The long-term damage will not be theoretical. Bangladesh will face deeper long-term loss, the economy will deteriorate, and ordinary people will be the ones left carrying the burden.

And now comes the political insurance policy. To secure impunity for these actions and corruption, Dr Yunus has planned a referendum-style drama designed to deliver a “Yes” victory. He wants that outcome to serve as a shield. Beyond that, he is moving to amend the constitution to build a governing structure in which no future political government can undo the decisions he has made. Western powers are openly consenting because it would secure their long-term influence and business interests in Bangladesh.

The purpose for which Dr Yunus took control of Bangladesh’s governance, has been fully executed. The staged election on the 12th is meant to apply the final seal.

Disclaimer: Views expressed by writers in this section are their own and do not reflect Milli Chronicle’s point-of-view.

So why would sections of the Western world want Jamaat? What does the Yunus-led interim administration gain from this? What role is it playing?

A recent report in The Washington Post cited a US diplomat working in Bangladesh, claiming Washington wants to build “friendly relations” with Jamaat-e-Islami. The diplomat reportedly made the remarks in a closed-door discussion with a group of Bangladeshi women journalists on 1 December. The newspaper’s report, we are told, was built around an audio recording of that conversation.

In that recording, the diplomat expressed optimism that Jamaat would perform far better in the 12 February election than it has in the past. He even suggested the journalists invite representatives of Jamaat’s student wing to their programmes and events.

When the journalists raised a fear that Jamaat, if empowered, could enforce Sharia law, the diplomat’s response was striking: he said he did not believe Jamaat would implement Sharia. And even if it did, he added, Washington could respond with measures such as tariffs. He was also heard arguing that Jamaat includes many university graduates in leadership and would not take such a decision.

The Washington Post further quoted multiple political analysts suggesting Jamaat could achieve its best result in history in the 12 February vote and might even end up in power.

So, is this report simply the product of an “audio leak” published just 20 days before the interim government’s election? I don’t think so.

First, it stretches belief that Bangladeshi journalists would secretly record a closed conversation with a US diplomat and then pass it to The Washington Post.

Second, The Washington Post would almost certainly have cross-checked the audio with the diplomat concerned. If the diplomat had objected, it is hard to imagine the paper moving ahead in this way. My conclusion is blunt: this was published with the diplomat’s planning, or at least with the US embassy’s consent.

Call it what it is: a soft signal. A carefully calibrated message designed to project reassurance about Jamaat and to normalise the idea of Jamaat as a legitimate future governing force.

And then came the echo.

At the same time, two other international outlets, Reuters and Al Jazeera, also published reports about Jamaat-e-Islami. Both pointed towards the possibility of a strong Jamaat showing in the 12 February election. Al Jazeera’s tone, heavy with praise, makes it difficult not to suspect paid campaigning. More tellingly, an Al Jazeera poll recently put Jamaat’s public support at 33.6%, compared with 34.7% for the BNP.

The goal is obvious: to “naturalise” Jamaat’s pathway to power. To make what should shock the public feel ordinary. To convert the unthinkable into the plausible, and the plausible into the inevitable.

Which brings us to the unavoidable question: can Jamaat really win?

History says no. The highest share of the vote Jamaat ever secured in a normal election was in 1991: 12.13%. In the next three elections, Jamaat’s vote share fell to 8.68%, 4.28%, and 4.7%. In a genuinely competitive election, Jamaat is not a double-digit party.

But Bangladesh is not heading into a normal election. An unelected, illegitimate interim administration is preparing a managed vote while keeping the country’s largest political party, the Awami League, effectively outside the electoral process.

In that distorted arena, behind-the-scenes engineering is underway to seat Jamaat on the throne. The diplomat’s “leak”, the favourable international coverage, and the publication of flattering polls are not isolated incidents. They are the components of a single operation.

If anyone doubts the direction of travel, they should remember what happened after 5 August. In his first public remarks after that date, the army chief repeatedly addressed Jamaat’s leader with reverential language, calling him “Ameer-e-Jamaat”. From that moment onwards, Jamaat has exerted an outsized, near-monopolistic influence over Bangladesh’s political field.

Yes, Khaleda Zia’s illness, Tarique Rahman’s possible return, and even the prospect of Khaleda Zia’s death have periodically given the BNP a breeze at its back. But the reel and string of the political kite are now held elsewhere. Jamaat controls the tempo.

And it did not happen in a vacuum. The Awami League has been driven off the streets through mob violence, persecution, repression and judicial harassment. With its principal rival forced away from political life, Jamaat has been able to present itself not merely as a participant, but as an authority.

Now look at the state itself.

Every major organ of power, it is argued, is being brought under Jamaat’s influence. Within the military, “Islamisation” is being used as a cover for Jamaatisation. Fifteen decorated army officers are reportedly jailed on allegations connected to the disappearance of Abdullah Hil Azmi, the son of Ghulam Azam, widely regarded as a leading figure among the razakars. Yet it remains unclear whether Azmi was even abducted at all.

The judiciary, too, is described as falling almost entirely under Jamaat’s control. Key administrative positions, especially DCs, SPs, UNOs and OCs, are increasingly occupied by Jamaat-aligned officials.

On campuses, the story repeats itself. Through engineered student union elections, Jamaat’s student organisation, Islami Chhatra Shibir, has established dominance in Dhaka University and other leading public universities. Even vice-chancellor appointments are described as being shaped by Jamaat-friendly influence.

And while this internal consolidation accelerates, external courtship intensifies.

Since August 2024, Jamaat leaders have reportedly held at least four meetings in Washington with US authorities. Their close contact with the US embassy in Bangladesh continues. Meanwhile, the British High Commissioner has held multiple meetings with Jamaat’s ameer, widely reported in the media. Jamaat’s ameer has also visited the United Kingdom recently.

In short, Jamaat has reached a level of favourable conditions never seen since its founding. Not even in Pakistan, the birthplace of its ideological ecosystem.

So why would sections of the Western world want Jamaat? What does the Yunus-led interim administration gain from this? What role is it playing?

The answer offered here is uncompromising: the current interim government has signed multiple agreements with Western powers, particularly the United States, including an NDA arrangement and various trade deals that are described as being against public interest. Some may be public. Much remains opaque. The government wants these agreements protected. It also wants long-term leverage over Bangladesh’s politics and territory.

From a broader geopolitical perspective, Bangladesh’s land matters. It sits at a strategic crossroads. For those intent on consolidating dominance in the Asia-Pacific and simultaneously containing the influence of both China and India, Bangladesh is useful. This is part of a long game.

And if Jamaat, with weak popular legitimacy, can be installed in power, external agendas become easier to execute. The argument is stark: Jamaat, as a party of war criminals and anti-liberation forces, has no natural sense of accountability to Bangladesh’s soil or its people. In exchange for power, it would hand foreign actors a blank cheque.

Now to Dr Yunus.

The claim here is that since taking power, Yunus has already fulfilled his personal ambitions. He has rewarded loyalists with state titles and positions, creating opportunities for them to accumulate money. He has satisfied the demands of the “deep state” that installed him. In doing so, the country’s interests have been sacrificed at every step.

And throughout, Jamaat has offered Yunus unconditional support.

After the election, Yunus’s priority will be survival: a safe exit for himself and his circle. That is tied to securing the future of the student leaders who claim to have been the principal stakeholders of July. In this narrative, Jamaat is stepping in again. The NCP has already aligned with Jamaat. To maintain international lobbying strength, Jamaat will ensure Yunus’s safe exit. It may even install him in the presidency if that serves the arrangement.

So what will the BNP do?

The answer given is grim: very little. Blinded by the hunger for power, the BNP has nodded along as Yunus and his circle pushed forward actions described as hostile to the national interest. Mirza Fakhrul has publicly claimed to see Zia within Yunus. Tarique Rahman has repeatedly been seen praising Yunus. All of it, the argument goes, for a single purpose: to reach power.

But the BNP, it is suggested, failed to understand the real game. At the grassroots, many of its leaders and activists have become disconnected from the public through extortion, land-grabbing and violent intimidation. Even when visible irregularities occurred in student union elections at universities, the BNP’s student wing, Chhatra Dal, either did not protest or could not.

If Jamaat takes power through a staged election on 12 February, the BNP will have no meaningful recourse left.

And the country?

The conclusion is bleak: Bangladeshis should not expect their suffering to end any time soon. Just as a meticulously designed operation removed an elected Awami League government, another meticulous design is now being finalised to seat Jamaat-e-Islami, a party branded by the author as one of war criminals, with the backing of foreign powers.

Yunus’s anti-national agreements, it is argued, will be implemented through Jamaat’s hands. Independence, sovereignty and the constitution will be thrown into the dustbin. Secularism, women’s freedom, and minority rights will be locked away in cold storage. The destination is spelled out without ambiguity:

Bangladesh will become the Islamic Republic of Bangladesh.

Disclaimer: Views expressed by writers in this section are their own and do not reflect Milli Chronicle’s point-of-view.