The military has been a central force in Bangladesh’s history, particularly in its tumultuous political landscape from independence in 1971 until the 1990s. This period was marked by coups, counter-coups, assassinations, and direct military rule. However, since the 1990s, the military’s overt role in politics has diminished, largely due to two factors: its participation in United Nations peacekeeping missions and its economic engagement through civilian and institutional roles. These dynamics have played a critical role in transforming the military’s function in state affairs, as evidenced by its restrained role during the July Revolution of 2024.
In the early years of Bangladesh, the military emerged as a powerful actor amid political instability. The assassination of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman in August 1975 was a watershed moment, marking the first successful military coup in the country. The coup was followed by a counter-coup led by Major General Khaled Musharraf in November 1975, which briefly attempted to restore discipline within the military. However, Musharraf’s reign lasted only four days, as he was overthrown and killed in a subsequent counter-coup led by soldiers loyal to Major General Ziaur Rahman, who was under house arrest during this time.
Zia’s rise to power as the country’s military ruler set the stage for a period of military dominance. However, his presidency ended in 1981 when he was assassinated in a failed coup orchestrated by Major General Abul Manzoor. This assassination exposed the deep factionalism within the military, as officers vied for control amid competing loyalties and visions for the country’s future. The era of Lieutenant General Hussain Muhammad Ershad, who seized power in 1982, further entrenched military rule.
Ershad’s regime, lasting until 1990, represented the peak of military dominance in Bangladeshi politics. However, growing popular resistance and international pressure eventually forced his resignation, ushering in a return to parliamentary democracy.
The year 1988 marked a pivotal moment for the Bangladesh military, as it began contributing to United Nations peacekeeping operations. The South Asian nation’s first deployment of uniformed personnel was to monitor the armistice between Iran and Iraq, signaling the start of a long-standing commitment to global peacekeeping. Over the subsequent decades, Bangladeshi peacekeepers have played critical roles in missions worldwide, serving in diverse capacities such as providing security, offering medical assistance, and constructing infrastructure. By December 2017, Bangladesh had become one of the largest contributors to U.N. peacekeeping operations, with 7,246 troops and police personnel deployed in 10 missions across the globe. Even today, it remains the third-largest source of U.N. peacekeepers.
This participation in U.N. missions not only bolstered the military’s professional standards but also brought significant financial and institutional benefits. The missions provided individual soldiers with stable income and international exposure, while enhancing the military’s global reputation and operational expertise.
Beyond the financial and professional gains, peacekeeping operations fundamentally reshaped the military’s priorities. The consistent engagement in these missions reduced the institution’s dependence on political intervention as a source of influence or resources. Instead, the military found prestige and stability through its role under the U.N.’s blue flag, fostering a focus on professionalism and global cooperation rather than domestic power struggles.
This transformation marked a departure from earlier decades when the military was heavily involved in Bangladesh’s volatile political landscape, punctuated by coups and counter-coups. Peacekeeping operations offered the armed forces a new identity, one centered on contributing to international stability and distancing themselves from the factionalism and instability of domestic politics.
Simultaneously, the government integrated the military into Bangladesh’s economic fabric. Military-run institutions, businesses, and projects – ranging from infrastructure development to educational institutions – provided new avenues for economic engagement. Organizations like the Rapid Action Battalion (RAB) also allowed the military to maintain a degree of influence in civil administration without overtly dominating politics. These dual incentives – international peacekeeping roles and domestic economic opportunities – created a vested interest for the military in maintaining stability and avoiding direct political involvement.
The military’s brief intervention during 2007–2008 reflected its evolving role. Unlike earlier periods, the military did not assume direct control but backed a caretaker government during a time of political deadlock. This intervention was shaped by both domestic factors and international geopolitics. The post-9/11 context saw increased scrutiny of Islamist movements, and – with the tacit approval of the United States, United Kingdom, and India – the caretaker government dismantled the Islamist political alliance led by Khaleda Zia. This intervention ultimately paved the way for Sheikh Hasina’s Awami League to return to power and establish a long period of political dominance.
During the July Revolution of 2024, the military faced significant pressure to intervene as protests against the government escalated. While the military was deployed to maintain order, its actions were restrained. Reports indicate that the military initially used very limited force but seemed to withdraw under pressure from international media and human rights organizations. It appears that the fear of jeopardizing their U.N. peacekeeping opportunities – critical for both institutional prestige and personal financial benefits – served as a powerful deterrent.
Another crucial factor was the leadership of General Waker Uz Zaman, who refrained from seizing power despite public calls for military intervention. His decision reflected a recognition of the long-term costs of direct rule in a politically volatile and economically fragile country. Unlike previous leaders, who saw coups as a means to assert control, Zaman prioritized the military’s international reputation and economic interests over short-term political gains.
That said, the evolution of the military’s role in Bangladesh – from a dominant political actor to a professional and economically engaged institution – has its roots in the lessons of history. The assassinations of Mujib, Zia, Manzoor, and Musharraf, along with the cycles of coups and counter-coups, highlighted the dangers of internal factionalism and the instability of direct military rule. These experiences, combined with the opportunities provided by peacekeeping missions and economic integration, have fundamentally reshaped the military’s priorities.
Today, the military remains a significant actor in Bangladesh’s statecraft, but its role is defined more by economic and professional interests than by political dominance. The July Revolution underscored this transformation, demonstrating that the military’s restraint was not merely a matter of individual leadership but a reflection of broader institutional changes. The dual incentives of international accountability and domestic economic integration have created a framework that discourages direct political intervention, ensuring that the military operates within the boundaries of a professional and globally connected institution.
This legacy, while not devoid of challenges, represents a significant shift from the turbulent years of coups and assassinations, marking a new chapter in the military’s role in Bangladesh’s governance and development.