Photo : Messenger
The chronicles of history are filled with instances of student-driven movements that have profoundly impacted the paths of nations. Noteworthy among these are the 1989 Tiananmen Square protests in China and the Bangladesh Quota Movement of 2024, which stand in stark contrast to one another, both in their outcomes and in the fundamental motivations that inspired them. While each movement was led by students, their objectives and the breadth of the issues they addressed reveal a significant divergence in the character of their activism.
In 1989, students in China convened at Tiananmen Square, driven not merely by a desire to assert their own rights but also to advocate for broader freedoms that would benefit all citizens. Their grievances encompassed widespread issues such as governmental corruption, a lack of transparency, and the infringement of fundamental human rights. The protesters sought to cultivate a society where every person, regardless of their social status, could freely exercise the essential democratic principles of speech, press, and assembly.
These students demonstrated a deep awareness of the larger challenges facing their country. They recognised that their struggle transcended personal ambitions; it was emblematic of a fight for the future well-being of every Chinese citizen. Their hunger strikes and mass demonstrations became potent symbols of a collective longing for a more just and equitable society—one in which individuals could live without fear of oppression. The Tiananmen movement represented an altruistic pursuit for universal welfare, undertaken even at great personal risk.
In a notable shift, the Bangladesh Quota Movement of 2024 emerged as a student-led protest primarily aimed at advocating for government employment opportunities for university graduates. This movement was catalysed by a governmental policy that reserved a substantial number of public sector jobs for specific groups, thereby undermining merit-based selection for candidates. While the validity of their claims is indisputable and they are justified in their pursuit of justice, the narrow scope of their demands suggests a focus on personal gain rather than an overarching concern for societal well-being.
Unlike the demonstrators at Tiananmen Square, who sought reforms benefiting the broader population, Bangladeshi students concentrated on securing their own employment while largely neglecting pressing national issues such as rampant corruption, severe poverty, labour struggles, inflation, deteriorating infrastructure, environmental degradation, inadequate healthcare services, and declining educational quality that adversely impact ordinary citizens. The movement's absence of an inclusive vision akin to that of the Tiananmen protests has led to criticisms regarding its perceived self-serving nature and shortsighted approach.
The success of the Bangladesh Quota Movement in persuading the government to revise the quota system signified a victory for the student demographic; however, this accomplishment came at the expense of broader societal reform. By focussing solely on their own career opportunities, the students failed to seize an essential opportunity to address systemic issues that affect all segments of society, not just those with higher education. This narrow viewpoint raises questions about the essence of student activism: Should it be driven by personal gain, or should it strive to improve the welfare of the entire community?
In contrast, although the Tiananmen Square protests faced harsh suppression, they left a lasting impact due to their profound message. The willingness of those students to risk their lives for a shared cause continues to imbue their movement with significance today. In comparison, one could view the legacy of the Bangladesh Quota Movement as one characterised by missed chances, where individual ambitions overshadowed potential pathways for substantial societal transformation.
The outcomes of the Tiananmen Square protest in 1989 and the Bangladesh Uprising in 2024 reveal marked differences in both their impacts and the associated loss of life. During the Tiananmen Square incident, Chinese authorities resorted to extreme military force, leading to a tragic and brutal crackdown on June 4, 1989. Estimates of the number of casualties among students and civilians vary widely, with some sources suggesting that fatalities may range from several hundred to potentially over a thousand. Since that time, the Chinese government has systematically suppressed discussions and acknowledgement of this tragic event, thereby obscuring the true extent of the casualties behind a shroud of secrecy.
Conversely, the Uprising in Bangladesh in 2024, characterised by considerable fervour and extensive public involvement, led to a notably lower casualty figure. As of August 2, official sources reported 215 fatalities and over 20,000 injuries, along with more than 11,000 arrests throughout various parts of the country. Unofficial estimates indicate that the actual death toll may fall between 300 and 500. Each fatality represents a significant loss, and we express our deepest sympathies to those who have died. Many analysts contend that although the uprising was primarily driven by self-interests related to the Quota Movement, it produced some positive developments; particularly, Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina of the Awami League encountered increasing pressure and civil unrest that ultimately led to her resignation on August 5, 2024.
The intensity of the protests and growing discontent among the populace forced her to seek refuge in India amidst the political turmoil. According to CNN, “The prime minister of Bangladesh, Sheikh Hasina, resigned and fled to neighbouring India on Monday after protesters stormed her official residence after weeks of deadly anti-government demonstrations in the South Asian nation.” The sudden departure of her leadership created a vacuum of authority, enabling the emergence of a temporary government. This situation allowed for extensive reforms aimed at addressing the deep-rooted issues that had long plagued the country. This transitional period marked a crucial turning point in Bangladesh's history, as the interim administration sought to implement changes that would reshape the political landscape and restore public trust in governmental institutions.
Analysing these two student movements highlights that the core of activism lies not only in its ability to bring about change but also in the vision that inspires such change. The events at Tiananmen Square exemplify how true revolutionaries champion the rights and freedoms of all people, rather than focusing solely on their own agendas. In contrast, although the Bangladesh Quota Movement met its immediate goals, it serves as a warning about the dangers of self-serving activism.
In a world rife with enduring inequality, corruption, and injustice, there is an urgent need for inclusive movements. While I hold deep sympathy for the protesters advocating for their rights in Bangladesh, it is crucial for future generations of activists to learn from the legacy of the students at Tiananmen Square, whose fight for universal freedoms continues to inspire those dedicated to fostering a more just society for all.
The writer is a poet, columnist, and an Assistant Professor, Department of English, University of Creative Technology Chittagong.
Messenger/Fameema
