Hasina's U-turn on 'US involvement': Why she now changes her position

"I could have remained in power if I had surrendered the sovereignty of Saint Martin Island and allowed America to hold sway over the Bay of Bengal, 'Please do not be manipulated by radicals." 

This was the stance ousted prime minister and convicted criminal Sheikh Hasina took in her first media interview in the Indian newspaper Economic Times on 11 August 2024. 

She blamed the US for her ouster and, before that, since 2023, cultivated a sharp, often personal, hostility toward the country, styling Washington as both a meddler and a looming threat to her hold on power. 

From allegations of sanctions-driven sabotage to claims of an outright regime-change conspiracy, Hasina deployed anti-Americanism as a political weapon. 

But her latest interviews with NDTV and CNN-News18 mark a dramatic change of tone. Now, more than 15 months after the July Uprising toppled her government, she says she sees "no decisive evidence" of US involvement. 

This sudden U-turn distancing herself from earlier anti-US conspiracy claims marks a sharp political recalibration — a striking shift for a leader who once insisted she was toppled in a US-planned conspiracy. 

The long arc of anti-American messaging

Hasina's anti-US rhetoric began in 2023. 

Her government was under increasing scrutiny from Washington over human rights abuses, extrajudicial killings by the Rapid Action Battalion (RAB), and the decline of democratic institutions. The US sanctions on RAB leadership in 2021 and the new visa policy in 2023 rattled Dhaka's political establishment. Hasina responded by framing the pressure as an attack on sovereignty.

In an interview with Yalda Hakim of BBC during her visit to the UK in May 2023, her frustration was unmistakable. "I don't know, maybe they don't want my work to continue. They may not be able to accept the improvements I have made for Bangladesh." 

Later, Hasina said in June 2023, hinting at US meddling in Bangladeshi politics, "If even now I were to say that I would lease out Saint Martin's Island or our country to someone, I would have no difficulty remaining in power — I know that. But that will never happen by my hand."

At a Dhaka Awami League event the same year, she dismissed the significance of American sanctions and visa restrictions altogether, saying, "It's no use worrying about who will impose visa restrictions or sanctions on us. It doesn't matter if we don't take a 20-hour plane journey to America by crossing the Atlantic. There are many other oceans and continents in the world." 

The messaging soon hardened into claims that Washington was pursuing a regime-change project. 

On 11 April 2023, speaking in parliament, she said, "I told the meeting that America practices its democracy all the way to the shores of the Atlantic. Does your definition of democracy change after it crosses the Atlantic? I also asked why they are supporting a military dictatorship. The country frequently gives lectures about democracy and some people, including the opposition party, are becoming cheerful after hearing the lecture," said Sheikh Hasina. 

"They are giving us lessons about democracy. In all aspects, they are talking about democracy and human rights. What is the state of their country?" she said.

As the domestic crisis deepened — inflation rising, dissent growing, and the opposition increasingly cornered — the US became a convenient external antagonist.

By mid-2024, the anti-US narrative intensified further. When the massive student-led uprising began over the quota system, her government chose brutal violence to suppress it. More than a thousand people were killed in the ensuing crackdown. On 5 August, finally, she was ousted and fled the country. Yet, rather than acknowledging state violence, Hasina and her cronies depicted the unrest as foreign-engineered.

"There is no consistency in Sheikh Hasina's statements. If she makes accusations without any evidence, it will likely damage her reputation, and perhaps she is now trying to regain favour with the United States. That is probably why she is changing her stance. She is becoming irrelevant in policy discourse. And now she is a convicted individual. So whether she accuses someone or not has no real relevance."

Major General (retd) ANM Muniruzzaman, president, Bangladesh Institute of Peace and Security Studies (BIPSS)

Conspiracy theories peak after 5 August 

Then came the extraordinary allegation on 11 August 2024. In a message circulated through Indian media after she fled to Delhi, Hasina claimed the US had orchestrated her ouster because she refused to hand over Saint Martin's Island. 

The implication was seismic: that Bangladesh's popular uprising was not a domestic revolt against authoritarianism, corruption, and lethal state force but a geopolitical struggle over a tiny coral island, which, in fact, may seem insignificant in a broader spectrum. 

This narrative collapsed almost instantly, since there was no evidence linking the US to the uprising — a movement rooted in widespread public anger at a quota system that shielded Awami League loyalists and the staggering state brutality documented by UN experts and Human Rights Watch. 

Still, the conspiracy theory found currency among Awami League exiles and some Indian commentators, who used it to externalise blame for the collapse of a deeply unpopular and repressive government.

The book interview: Escalation into outright fabrication

Hasina doubled down even a year after her fall. In the 2025 book 'Inshallah Bangladesh', she again portrayed the uprising not as a popular movement but as a terror attack planned by America and executed by Pakistan. 

"Don't call it a revolution. It was a terror attack on Bangladesh disguised as a students' revolt planned by America and executed by Pakistan."

She further insisted that the police had not killed protesters, alleging instead that terrorists had staged the killings to make her government look violent. This claim was not only unsubstantiated, but contradicted by extensive visual evidence, eyewitness accounts, and forensic findings.

Through 2024 and 2025, Hasina's narrative grew increasingly detached from reality — always centred on a foreign conspiracy, always avoiding responsibility for state failures and abuses. It maintained a political purpose: creating a victimhood narrative that could rally her supporters, especially those abroad, around a "wronged leader" persecuted by global powers.

The sudden U-turn

Against this backdrop, Hasina's remarks on 17 November 2025 are remarkable. In her interviews with NDTV and CNN-News18, she said she does not believe the US or any Western state played a direct role in her ouster. 

She described US–Bangladesh relations as "good and stable", dismissing theories of external meddling as lacking credibility. 

She even suggested that Western admiration for Muhammad Yunus had been based on "erroneously equated" assumptions about his political appeal.

This is not merely a softening — it is a dismantling of her own earlier claims.

Why has she changed her tune?

Major General (retd) ANM Muniruzzaman, president of the Bangladesh Institute of Peace and Security Studies (BIPSS) said, "There is no consistency in Sheikh Hasina's statements. If she makes accusations without any evidence, it will likely damage her reputation, and perhaps she is now trying to regain favour with the United States. That is probably why she is changing her stance. She is becoming irrelevant in policy discourse. And now she is a convicted individual. So whether she accuses someone or not has no real relevance." 

According to Tanvir Habib Jewel, Assistant Professor of International Relations at Dhaka University, the shift reflects a deliberate strategy:

"I think this is a reflection of their (AL's) attempts at course correction or at least a virtue signalling. It's understandable that they've employed lobbyists and PR firms and perhaps it might be a suggestion from those people. 

"Moreover, this course correction is also occurring under the condition of strained relations between the US and India. As long as she was in power, there was less motivation to change course, considering her regional benefactor maintained a high-level strategic relationship with the US. Her ouster happened to coincide with a broader shuffling of regional dynamics and a reevaluation of Indo-US relations," he added.

With India–US relations now more strained, the calculus is different. Hasina and the Awami League can no longer rely on Delhi to smooth over tensions with Washington.

Moreover, after more than a year of rallying her base using anti-US victimhood narratives, the party appears confident enough to pivot toward seeking international legitimacy. As Jewel warns, this is risky: moderate supporters may view the shift as opportunistic and manipulative. The party may therefore adopt a dual strategy. 

"Her and the party's long-time vitriol against the US hasn't been lost on anyone. While in power it was a reflection of her deep-held contempt for the USA but also that she used this rhetoric as a negotiating tool. After the ouster, in the initial days, it was a way to consolidate the support base in a victimhood mentality. 

"Such a victimhood mentality creates a 'rally around the flag' effect. After having done so for the last year and more, I think they (AL) are confident that they can shift tactics to garner international support while maintaining their support base intact. It's a risky calculation, as moderate supporters might feel betrayed and used. In this regard they might employ a dual approach of party higher-ups being softer on the US while online activists engage in terming every step the Interim government takes as a foreign conspiracy," Jewel added. 

This creates plausible deniability — a well-known Awami League tactic.

The credibility gap

Washington has not forgotten Hasina's anti-American crusade. 

Jon Danilowicz, former Deputy Chief of Mission of the US Embassy in Dhaka, responded bluntly in his X post, "Nice try Apa, but you can't attack the United States for years and then pretend none of that happened. Anti-Americanism is baked into your and the AL's DNA."

He told TBS, "Hasina's about face is reminiscent of George Orwell's Big Brother, who would casually reinvent history when it served his purposes and then expect all his supporters to fall in line.   Hasina's public relations team must have realised that blaming the US for her downfall was not credible and risked further alienating the Trump Administration.    

"So," he added, "she changed course to focus her ire on some of Professor Yunus' most prominent international supporters. This does not change the reality that a "foreign regime change plot" is nothing more than a fantasy."

Muniruzzaman said, "What is significant, however, is that her accusations and her statements are completely imbalanced — they lack consistency or coherence. And now, as she loses further relevance, we can expect more statements of this sort from her." 

The comment reveals the difficulty Hasina faces in rehabilitating her international image. While the US tolerated her rhetoric while she held power, Washington may be far less patient now — especially as Bangladesh heads toward its first competitive election in over a decade.

Jewel makes a similar point: with a democratic government expected by February 2026, US–Bangladesh relations will likely be reset based on the new administration's legitimacy, not on the historical ties of a single political dynasty.

"A key driver of US calculus on Bangladesh would be the democratic transition. Once an elected government has taken charge by February 2026, leading to relative stability, Bangladesh-US relations would come out of the old cocoon and chart a new invigorated path." 

Why the shift matters

Hasina's new tone signals that the propaganda value of blaming the US has run its course. What matters now is reopening diplomatic channels, recovering relevance, and avoiding further international isolation.

But the pivot also reveals something else: Hasina's narratives have always been shaped less by truth and more by political need. In power, anti-US rhetoric was a tool of defiance. In exile, it became a story of martyrdom. Today, as she tries to re-enter the global conversation, she discards both.

Whether anyone is convinced is another matter entirely.