General (Retd.) Iqbal Karim Bhuiyan Urges Caution Against Another 1/11 Political Crisis

In a moment that stirred political memory and raised eyebrows, General (Retd.) Iqbal Karim Bhuiyan—former Chief of Army Staff—publicly warned against any recurrence of the 2007 political turmoil known in Bangladesh as the 1/11 episode. His statement comes amid intensified political maneuvering and public concerns surrounding recent comments by top officials and the ongoing political instability.

Iqbal Karim Bhuiyan Warns Against 1/11 Repeat Amid Political Turmoil

Iqbal Karim Bhuiyan, a highly respected figure in Bangladesh’s military history, recently took to his verified Facebook page to issue a rare but pointed warning. His message: “I do not wish to see a repeat of 1/11. The nation will suffer irreparable damage. The army had to endure extensive harm from such unconstitutional actions in the past. We must avoid further turmoil.” His words reflect a deep concern over the current socio-political landscape and hint at the memories of Bangladesh’s turbulent political past.

His remarks follow recent controversial statements made by General Waqar-uz-Zaman and a closed-door meeting led by Chief Advisor Dr. Muhammad Yunus, fueling speculation and unrest. This has sparked comparisons to the prelude of the 2007 political state of emergency, when a military-backed caretaker government was installed after widespread street protests and political deadlock.

Historical Echoes of 1/11 and National Sensitivities

The term “1/11” in Bangladesh refers to January 11, 2007, when the country plunged into political chaos following months of street agitations. A state of emergency was declared, suspending civil rights and effectively sidelining political parties. The army played a central role in supporting a technocratic caretaker government. While intended to restore order and electoral fairness, the episode left a lasting impact on the nation’s democratic institutions and military’s public image.

General Bhuiyan’s comments have reignited debates over the role of the military in democratic governance. His insistence that “further unrest will not bring any benefit” resonates with a public weary of political instability. He represents a generation of leadership that experienced firsthand the institutional backlash and reputational damage the military faced post-1/11.

The cautionary tale is more than symbolic. It serves as a stark reminder that democratic resilience must be prioritized, and constitutional processes upheld—even amid crises. His remarks align with democratic values and underline the necessity of avoiding any extra-constitutional interventions.

Mounting Political Pressure and the Yunus-Led Meeting

On May 22, Chief Advisor Dr. Muhammad Yunus convened a marathon four-hour meeting with the advisory council. The agenda was broad: address the political gridlock, recent military remarks, and national governance issues. The discussions reportedly led Dr. Yunus to consider resignation, signaling how deeply the crisis is affecting the nation’s leadership core.

This backdrop of uncertainty provides context for General Bhuiyan’s remarks. It’s not just a reaction to history—it’s a response to an evolving crisis that could steer the nation back to instability if not carefully managed. General Waqar-uz-Zaman’s earlier comments, which caused considerable uproar nationwide, added fuel to the fire, pushing stakeholders toward emergency consultations and introspection.

As a seasoned military leader who served with distinction, Bhuiyan’s stance is more than personal opinion—it echoes a broader institutional reluctance to return to a path that once led to significant challenges both for the military and the state.

Public Reaction and Political Repercussions

General Bhuiyan’s post swiftly garnered widespread public attention, especially among civil society groups, political analysts, and social media influencers. While some lauded his candor, others questioned the timing of the statement. However, across the spectrum, there was acknowledgment that his warning underscores a growing sense of urgency and unease.

It’s not uncommon in South Asia for retired military figures to weigh in on national issues, but Bhuiyan’s stature and timing lend his statement added gravity. As tensions rise and stakeholders weigh their moves, his remarks could serve as a catalyst for de-escalation—urging political leaders to prioritize dialogue over confrontation.

Internal discussions within the ruling coalition and opposition groups have reportedly intensified, with renewed focus on constitutional adherence. Prominent figures have called for all institutions—including the military—to maintain their constitutional boundaries, reflecting a collective awareness of the fragility of democratic processes in such charged times.

Call for Constitutional Integrity and Democratic Resilience

General Bhuiyan’s remarks come as a clarion call: uphold democracy, resist the allure of expedient but harmful interventions, and protect the republic’s foundational institutions. His words carry weight not just for their content, but because they stem from a veteran whose service history reflects commitment to national stability and security.

Observers note that political healing and progress can only be achieved through inclusive dialogue, electoral transparency, and institutional accountability. In this, Bhuiyan’s statement may serve as a timely moral compass.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

What did General Iqbal Karim Bhuiyan say about the 1/11 incident?

He warned against repeating the 1/11 crisis, highlighting that such unconstitutional actions caused irreparable damage to the nation and the army.

Who is General (Retd.) Iqbal Karim Bhuiyan?

He is a former Chief of Army Staff of Bangladesh and a respected military figure who served the country with distinction during critical periods.

Why are his comments significant now?

His comments come at a time of political uncertainty in Bangladesh, evoking memories of the 2007 crisis and urging all stakeholders to act constitutionally.

What happened on January 11, 2007, in Bangladesh?

It marks the beginning of a state of emergency and the installation of a military-backed caretaker government after political unrest escalated.

How did the public react to Bhuiyan’s statement?

Public reaction was mixed but largely serious, with many viewing his remarks as a crucial reminder of the need for democratic stability.

Is there a possibility of another state of emergency?

While not certain, the warnings and political climate suggest heightened concern, making constitutional dialogue more crucial than ever.