(This report utilizes Samya for Hindu News by American Hindus Against Defamation (AHAD) )
Hindus Advancing Human Rights (HAHRI) Response to NYT: Addressing Persecution of Hindus in Bangladesh
The New York Times article, published on Dec. 24, 2024, “Sorting Fact From Fiction as Fear Engulfs Bangladesh’s Hindus,” attempts to address the rising concerns of violence against Hindus in Bangladesh. While the report touches upon significant issues, it underplays the systematic nature of persecution faced by the Hindu community. This response seeks to present a balanced, research-based narrative by addressing gaps in the NYT article and providing evidence-backed insights into the issue.
The Yunus Regime and Its Impact
The NYT report references the tenure of the Yunus regime, highlighting its focus on economic development and microfinance initiatives. However, it fails to explore how governance under Yunus inadvertently created conditions that fueled Islamist extremism. Despite its global acclaim, Yunus’ governance left significant power vacuums at the grassroots level, enabling radical elements to grow unchecked.
The rise of organizations like Hefazat-e-Islam during this period underscores the creeping influence of hardline Islamist ideologies in Bangladesh. Their public demonstrations against secular governance, combined with targeted attacks on Hindu communities, reflect an organized effort to suppress religious minorities. This trajectory sharply contrasts Yunus’ international image as a progressive leader, revealing a dichotomy between his economic policies and the socio-political reality under his rule.
Systematic Targeting, Not Isolated Incidents
The NYT article frames violence against Hindus as “sporadic” and resulting from “localized disputes.” However, historical patterns and recent incidents suggest otherwise. Events like the 2021 Durga Puja attacks, where over 100 temples and religious sites were desecrated within days, underscore the coordinated nature of such violence. These incidents often coincide with political turmoil or key cultural events, making it clear that they are not isolated but reflective of deeper societal biases.
Furthermore, the continuous desecration of Hindu temples—documented as far back as the 1980s and continuing into 2024—highlights a systematic effort to erode Hindu cultural and religious identity. Reports such as “Hindu Temples: What Happened to Them?” by Sita Ram Goel provide a grim historical perspective, tracing how religious persecution has persisted over centuries in the region, evolving in form but not in intent.
Overlooked Historical and Contemporary Evidence
The NYT report acknowledges the Hindu population decline in Bangladesh but fails to correlate this with historical and systemic factors. Census data reveal that the Hindu population in Bangladesh has dwindled from 22% in 1951 to less than 8% today. This decline is not just a demographic trend but a consequence of sustained persecution, including forced conversions, land seizures, and targeted violence.
Even contemporary examples point to the dire situation. In 2024 alone, several Hindu households were reportedly attacked during local elections, with victims citing religious identity as the primary motive. Such incidents rarely receive widespread attention, contributing to the perception that the violence is less pervasive than it actually is.
Economic Disparity as a Misleading Explanation
The article suggests that economic disparities and communal tensions fuel Hindu-Muslim conflicts in Bangladesh. While economic differences exist, they are often weaponized to justify religious violence rather than being the root cause. Hindu communities, particularly in rural areas, frequently face targeted expropriation of property under the guise of “economic disputes.” The Vested Property Act, a law allowing the state to confiscate property from “enemies of the state,” disproportionately affected Hindus, stripping them of land and livelihoods.
These systemic issues reflect institutionalized discrimination, not random economic grievances. The lack of legal recourse for Hindu victims further exacerbates their vulnerability, fostering a culture of impunity for perpetrators.
Misplaced Focus on Indian Policies
The NYT piece shifts focus to India’s policies, particularly under the BJP-led government, framing them as exacerbating cross-border tensions. The Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) is often cited as an example. However, this narrative overlooks the humanitarian intent behind the CAA, which provides refuge to persecuted minorities from neighboring countries, including Bangladeshi Hindus. Rather than exacerbating tensions, such policies highlight the need for accountability from countries like Bangladesh in safeguarding minority rights.
Revisiting Religious Freedom in Bangladesh
Bangladesh’s constitution proclaims secularism, but ground realities often contradict this principle. Religious freedom is compromised by institutional biases, mob violence, and the societal stigma associated with minority identities. Organizations such as Amnesty International have documented numerous cases where authorities failed to protect minorities or prosecute perpetrators. A broader acknowledgment of these systemic issues is essential for addressing the root causes of persecution.
International and Regional Implications
The persecution of Hindus in Bangladesh is not just a local issue but a regional concern with far-reaching implications. Targeted violence against any minority undermines the region’s stability and calls into question global commitments to human rights. Governments, international organizations, and civil society must collaborate to ensure that vulnerable communities receive protection and justice.
A Call for Comprehensive Engagement
The narrative around Hindu persecution in Bangladesh requires a nuanced and comprehensive approach. Here are some key considerations for stakeholders:
- Amplifying Marginalized Voices: To present a balanced narrative, media outlets and international organizations must prioritize the voices of affected communities. Firsthand accounts of survivors often reveal the systemic nature of violence better than official statements.
- Evidence-Based Reporting: Journalistic integrity requires thoroughly examining historical, legal, and societal contexts. Selective reporting risks perpetuating misconceptions and undermining the severity of the issue.
- Regional Cooperation: India and Bangladesh must engage in constructive dialogue to address cross-border concerns while ensuring minority protection in Bangladesh.
- Advocacy and Accountability: Civil society groups and international organizations should advocate for stronger legal protections for minorities in Bangladesh and hold perpetrators accountable through transparent judicial processes.
Conclusion: Toward an Informed Understanding
The NYT article opens a conversation but leaves critical gaps in addressing the systemic persecution faced by Hindus in Bangladesh. A more profound engagement with historical evidence, contemporary incidents, and regional dynamics is crucial for fostering an informed and just discourse. Only by acknowledging and addressing the root causes of these issues can we hope to build a future where all communities can coexist with dignity and equality.
HAHRI is an initiative of HinduPACT