Dhaka, Mar 15 (UNI) Bangladesh has cancelled the diplomatic passport of the “immediate-past” envoy to Morocco, Mohammad Harun Al Rashid, for his Facebook post wherein he terms Mohammad Yunus as “a tyrant cloaked in deception” and describes the country’s descent into “radical extremism and savagery” under the Yunus-led Interim Government.
In a post titled “A Plea for Bangladesh—and for Myself” on the subject “Bangladesh’s Descent into Anarchy under Yunus — The World’s Silence Is Painful”, he writes:
“Bangladesh writhes under the savagery unleashed by Nobel laureate Dr. Muhammad Yunus. Millions face an impossible choice: death, exile, or submission to radical extremism.”
He describes the ousting of former PM Sheikh Hasina following a “student-led” uprising on August 5, 2024, as one of “the darkest hours” for the nation.
“A meticulously coordinated terrorist onslaught that shattered the nation’s foundations by overthrowing the legitimate government of Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina. As the country burned and order collapsed, Muhammad Yunus emerged as the usurper.”
He describes the overthrow of the Hasina-led Awami League government as “Perhaps the most devastatingly successful act of terror—one that reshaped an entire nation overnight.”
He writes: “The Rise of a Terrorist Movement: A Calculated Plan
“For years, digital terrorists such as Pinaki Bhattacharya and Elias Hossain have exploited Western countries as platforms for radicalization and manipulation. They have waged an online war against Bangladesh’s government, spreading disinformation and inciting unrest. Just look at how Pinaki, from France, and Elias, from the U.S., orchestrated the destruction of the Bangabandhu Memorial Museum online—an act of sheer brutality and criminality,” referring to the mob-led demolition of the memorial to the nation’s founder Sheikh Mujibur Rahman.
“Meanwhile, jihadists like Farhad Mazhar and Zahedur Rahman have thrived inside Bangladesh, abusing Sheikh Hasina’s commitment to free speech. Their propaganda fuels extremist hatred against Hindus and India, simply because Hindus felt safe under her rule.
“Their fabrications have transformed anti-India sentiment into a psychological disorder among Muslims in Bangladesh who are susceptible to radicalization.”
On the media, he writes: “Under Muhammad Yunus’s regime, the media has been both servile and silenced. Brutalities have unfolded daily—hidden from the world. The extremists have convinced Bangladeshis that the West no longer takes Islamic terrorism seriously—giving radicals free rein. And so far, they have been proven correct.”
He writes that the Islamic jihadists have destroyed Bangladesh’s Identity.
“These jihadists have already uprooted Bangladesh’s secular and cultural identity, erasing its history and traditions—under Yunus’s direct supervision.
“They haven’t just destroyed museums, murals, sculptures and cultural symbols; they’ve razed hundreds of Sufi shrines and Hindu temples. Under Yunus’s rule, few countries oppress women more.
“Minorities and secularists live in constant fear, while Hizb ut-Tahrir, IS, and Al-Qaeda flaunt their red and black flags, openly demanding Islamic theocracy. The July–August terrorists came straight from their ranks.”
He accuses Yunus of shielding and empowering the Islamists, with most of them having been set free from the prison terms they were sentenced to under Sheikh Hasina.
“But Yunus didn’t just shield them—he empowered them. His government includes terrorists as ministers, and those he couldn’t install, he patronized—allowing them to form a political party.”
“As Bangladesh’s Ambassador to Morocco, I was singled out. My ‘crime’? Writing a Bengali novel about Bongobondhu’s early years (1920–1942)—entirely unrelated to later events.”
He accuses Yunus of a calculated attempt to erase Bangladesh’s history.
“Yunus’s hatred for our history isn’t mere contempt. It’s a deliberate, calculated attempt to erase Bangladesh’s very foundation.”
“Bangladesh was born secular, but from its first breath, Islamists and jihadists conspired to tear it apart. The country’s founding father, Bongobondhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, believed in reconciliation, hoping they would embrace the ideals of the Liberation War. They did not. Instead, they murdered him in cold blood.
“Decades later, his daughter, Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, took a similarly tolerant approach. But in the end, she too fell—to the same extremists who had spent years weaving deception into the nation’s fabric, only to strike with barbaric force.”
Referring to the rampant killings and violence that overtook Bangladesh on August 5 last year, he writes:
“If human rights violations were truly examined, an independent, impartial investigation would reveal a horrifying truth: the atrocities committed in just 15 days after her ouster—under Yunus’s protection—far exceeded those of her entire tenure.
“In those two weeks, Bangladesh descended into terror. Mobs lynched hundreds of police personnel—pregnant women begged for mercy, only to be slaughtered. Hundreds of Awami League supporters were beaten to death, their bodies left as warnings. Such barbarity, on such a massive scale, has not been seen in centuries.
“This exposes a hard truth: while Bangladeshi secularists repeatedly sought compromise, jihadists never wavered in their mission to annihilate them. Under Muhammad Yunus, that mission accelerated.
“The brutality under Yunus makes one truth inescapable:
“Only Sheikh Hasina stands between Bangladesh and complete theocratic rule.”
Referring to the prosecution of Yunus under Sheikh Hasina for corruption, he writes:
“When Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina’s government prosecuted Yunus for corruption, he painted himself as a victim—and the world believed him.
“But make no mistake: none of these charges were false. One could argue that others committing similar offenses went unpunished, but that does not absolve Yunus of his crimes.
“His greed knew no bounds. Once in power, he wiped his slate clean—escaping justice and dodging 6630 million Bangladeshi Taka in just one case.”
“Yunus’s goons rampage across Bangladesh, taunting its forsaken people. 'You can’t picture Yunus as a terrorist—the world won’t buy it. Everyone who matters knows him.' So far, they’ve been right, and that only deepens the cruelty. They burn, lynch, and brutalize—while we, the victims, remain voiceless, invisible.
“Since seizing control, Yunus has torn off his mask—revealing not a reformer, but a tyrant cloaked in deception. His latest deception? Claiming Sheikh Hasina left Bangladesh “like Gaza”—a calculated, insidious lie to inflame his radical Islamist base.
“While Sheikh Hasina painstakingly built Bangladesh, Yunus has waged war against it. He has sabotaged its economy, incited riots, and empowered extremists, dragging the nation toward civil war.”
Describing one of Yunus’ closes aides, student activist Mahfuj Alam as a “terrorist”, he writes: “When Yunus himself introduced one of the terrorists, Mahfuj Alam, in New York—standing in the presence of former U.S. President Bill Clinton—and presented him as the mastermind of the July-August terrorist attacks.
“This demands an answer from the free world:
“How would the French react if someone openly celebrated a terrorist responsible for the Charlie Hebdo massacre? How would Americans react if the mastermind of 9/11 were honored in New York, just as Yunus did? Bangladesh felt the same outrage, the same deep sense of injury and humiliation. This was not just an insult to our nation but an affront to justice itself.”
Describing Yunus’s Grameen Bank as “built on an even more exploitative model”, he writes:
“Consider this: A garment worker toils in hardship, but she does not carry the weight of debt.
“A Grameen borrower, however, takes a loan—then another, and another—trapped in an endless cycle of repayment. She must work harder than any factory laborer, not just to survive, but to outrun a debt disguised as empowerment.
“Yet, the West glorifies Yunus”.
“I could cite hundreds of examples of the terrors Yunus unleashed. Yet, this is no rhetoric—every claim here is public and provable. Ignoring the truth won’t erase it.
“The West bears a double responsibility in restraining Yunus—he rose to prominence as their protégé. Has a Nobel laureate ever presided over such barbarity in history?
“History will remember Yunus, but not as a hero—only as a swindler who deceived the world and descended into terror. In betraying his own nation, he also disgraced those in the West who still champion him.
“Yet, this is not a diplomatic note. It is the raw, urgent cry of a man whose country has been stolen, whose life has been shattered—punished by Yunus’s regime for the simple act of writing, for daring to remember history, for remaining loyal to the truth.
“Today, I am voiceless, a persecuted diplomat, an exiled novelist pleading from the wilderness. But tomorrow, it may be your silence, your apathy, that history condemns. Listen now—not just to me, but to the silenced millions whose cries Muhammad Yunus has drowned in blood and lies.
“Sincerely, Harun Al Rashid, A Persecuted Bangladeshi Diplomat and Secular Citizen”.
UNI RN