Former Adviser Criticizes Interim Government’s Direction for Youth and Reforms
Hossain Zillur Rahman, a former adviser to the caretaker government, has criticized the recent interim government. He pointed out three main failures. One major failure was guiding young people in the wrong way. He said it encouraged young people to seek power for themselves.
Mr. Rahman spoke at a discussion event on Saturday morning. The event took place at a hotel in the capital. SOAS Anti-Corruption Evidence organized it. This group is an international research body from SOAS University of London.
The interim government came to power after the 2024 youth-led uprising. This uprising ended the Awami League’s long rule. Nobel laureate Professor Muhammad Yunus led the interim government. It governed for about one and a half years. Then it held a general election and stepped down. The Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) won that election.
Mr. Rahman identified the three main failures of the Yunus government. First, it brought many bureaucrats into important government roles. Second, it gave young people poor guidance. Third, it did not follow its own plans for reform.
He said young people became very attracted to political power. Mr. Rahman argued that the Yunus government failed to guide them properly. This caused a lack of discipline. It also prevented the development of strong future leaders. He also observed that education is now seen as less important in society.
The government’s deals with bureaucrats blocked the state reform agenda. This agenda was strongly supported during the July uprising. Mr. Rahman said the interim government did not understand when bold changes were needed. Instead, it chose a careful approach from the start.
It did not remove the old bureaucratic structure. Instead, it appointed officials from the same bureaucracy to key positions. Because of this, the hoped-for changes did not happen. The existing system remained largely the same.
The former adviser also stated that the interim government often talked about reform. However, it lacked true dedication to carry out these changes. He argued that the chance for meaningful reform was not fully used. Mr. Rahman added that the Yunus government made “reform” a popular word. Yet, it ignored the advice from its own reform commissions. He said the government only pretended to make reforms.
