Debate has sparked over a virtual meeting between BNP's acting chairman Tarique Rahman and student representatives on 5 August last year. The controversy arises from claims in a book by Asif Mahmud Sajib Bhuiyan, Local Government Advisor to the interim government and a counter statement by Ehsan Mahamud, Assistant Editor of Daily Samakal.
In his book, Asif Mahmud asserts that only four individuals, including himself, attended the meeting with Tarique Rahman. He writes: "At that meeting, I, Nahid Bhai (Nahid Islam, Convenor, Jatiya Nagorik Party (NCP)), Mahfuz Bhai (Mahfuz Alam, Advisor, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Interim Government), and Nasir Bhai (Nasir Uddin Patwari, Chief Coordinator, NCP) were present." (Page 114).
However, on Wednesday, 19 March, Ehsan Mahamud challenged this version of events in a Facebook post, providing a more extensive list of attendees.
According to Ehsan, apart from the four individuals Asif Mahmud mentioned, others such as Ariful Islam Adib (Joint Convenor, Jatiya Nagorik Committee), Abubakar Majumdar (Central Convenor, Bangladesh Ganotantrik Chhatra Sangsad), and several BNP leaders including A.K.M. Wahiduzzaman, BNP's Central Secretary for Information and Technology; Rakibul Islam Rakib, Central President of Chhatra Dal; and Nasir Uddin Nasir, General Secretary of Chhatra Dal were also present at the meeting with Tarique Rahman.
He further revealed that Tarique Rahman's daughter, Jaima Rahman, attended the meeting.
Ehasan's post highlights that Tarique Rahman began the meeting by introducing his daughter to the student leaders. He reportedly stated: "On this special day, I felt it was appropriate to introduce my daughter, who is close to your age. This day is historic for the people of Bangladesh. Through your and the nation's struggle, Bangladesh has been freed from autocracy."
The meeting lasted 40 to 45 minutes, focusing on post-autocracy public safety and the possible structure of the next government.
Ehsan also disclosed that the session was held under extreme secrecy in a small, glass-walled room inside the Channel 24 office, with only a select group granted access.
Asif Mahmud responded to Ehasan's post, accusing him of misrepresenting facts. He defended his book by stating: "Your statement is false and incomplete. The book clearly mentions that you and Adib Arif Bhai arranged the meeting. You left that part out while calling my information false. I only listed the names of those from our side. Only Bakar's name was missing. Apart from Tarique Rahman, I did not mention anyone else's name."
Ehasan, in turn, pointed out factual errors in Asif's book, particularly concerning his professional identity at the time of the meeting. He clarified: "Asif mentioned me as a journalist for Manabzamin, but at that time, I was working for Netra News." He further stated that his repeated dismissals from Bangladeshi media outlets were politically motivated, influenced by the Prime Minister's Office and the then Information Minister.
Ehasan strongly criticised Asif's book, accusing him of omitting crucial details and misleading the public. He wrote: "More student meetings were held with Tarique Rahman beyond what is mentioned in the book. The full speech of Tarique Rahman has not been included.
I will soon provide alternative details regarding the interim government formation."
He also defended Prothoma Publication, the publisher of Asif's book, against public backlash. He argued that criticism should be directed at the author rather than the publishing house, stating: "Blaming the publisher instead of the writer is neither logical nor wise."
Ehasan's statements, along with images from the virtual conference, have gone viral on social media, triggering diverse opinions from netizens.
Faruk Hasan, spokesperson of Gano Adhikar Parishad, strongly criticized the interim government, arguing that its actions had been more damaging to historical narratives than those of the Awami League. He stated, "It took Awami League 47 years to hijack history, and these guys have destroyed it in just 7 months."
Echoing concerns about historical accuracy, Himika Hasan, a student of Eden Mohila College, pointed out apparent contradictions in the discourse surrounding the book. She questioned, "If the author forgets a name, it is false and deceptive, but if the post writer forgets a name, it is okay? There's a clear effort to discredit these student leaders!" Aminul Islam, from Belbhuj village, Barura Upazila, Comilla, wrote: "Asif's book has lost its credibility as an authentic historical document of July 24. No need to fuss over it."
Md Abdus Samad Munna, a political science student at Sreemangal Govt. National University, wrote: "Writing a book takes time, so why did Asif rush it? Many crucial details are missing. This is how history gets distorted."
Meanwhile, Md Saiful Islam, an expatriate in Australia, went further by directly accusing Asif Mahmud of distorting the official history of the 2024 uprising. He asserted, "From what I have gathered, Asif Mahmud is the first to distort the official history of the 2024 uprising through this book. He has concealed, altered, and manipulated information." This accusation suggests a deliberate attempt to rewrite the events in a way that aligns with a particular agenda.
Taking an even more extreme position, Maksudul Haque, a technician at NXP Semiconductors, called for both censorship and accountability. He insisted, "This book should be banned, and Asif should be held accountable for multiple instances of historical distortion!" His statement reflects the growing intensity of the backlash against the publication, with some critics advocating not just for debate but for punitive measures against the author.
Ahmed Kuasha, a Sweden-based expatriate, wrote: "They wanted to hand power to Tarique Rahman. When Tarique refused to take power without his anti-autocracy allies, suddenly he became the bad guy. Typical!"
As the debate escalates, it calls for clarifications on the meeting's attendees and the accuracy of Asif Mahmud's book continue to grow. With public sentiment divided and more voices emerging, the dispute over Bangladesh's recent political history is far from settled.
