November 7: A Revival of Bangladesh-Centred Nationalism
November 7, 1975, was a significant political turning point in Bangladesh’s history. It brought renewed attention to the country’s state direction, national identity and sovereign existence. This is the basis for viewing the day as a revolution. November 7 was a political upheaval in which soldiers and civilians joined forces in an uprising against the power struggles that had destabilised the country between August and November 1975. It marked the beginning of a new search for Bangladesh’s national identity.
Bangladesh gained independence in 1971 with the aspiration of establishing a separate nation-state. However, the country soon faced serious challenges in managing its political and economic systems. A one-party political system, centralised administration, economic crisis and restrictions on political rights created a gap between the ideals of independence and the realities of state governance.
The crisis deepened after 1975. The November 3 coup and power struggles within the armed forces pushed the country into further uncertainty. Against this backdrop, the November 7 uprising by soldiers and civilians was a sudden response to the existing power structure. Anger among ordinary soldiers, dissatisfaction with military leadership and concerns about the country’s future came together. The release of Ziaur Rahman was the most visible outcome of the uprising, but its political significance was much broader. The participation of soldiers disrupted the existing power structure and set Bangladesh on a new political course.
Another reason for viewing November 7 as a revolution is the revival of Bangladesh-centred nationalism. This concept refers to a vision of the state based on Bangladesh’s own history, territory, people, culture, religious and social traditions, political identity and right to make independent decisions. After independence, there was considerable debate over how the country’s national identity should be defined. The events of November 7 brought renewed emphasis on national sovereignty, a distinct state identity and an independent political direction.
Bangladesh-centred nationalism represents a distinct political philosophy focused on the country’s national interests. Its central principle is that Bangladesh’s national identity, policies, diplomacy, economy and cultural direction should be shaped by its own history, territory, people, traditions and interests. The geopolitical ambitions, cultural influence or political guardianship of another country should not determine Bangladesh’s state decisions.
Understanding this idea requires an examination of Bangladesh’s geopolitical position after independence. The country occupied a sensitive position in South Asia. It had geographical, historical and economic ties with India, religious, cultural and diplomatic links with the Muslim world, and relations with China, the United States and other international powers. In this context, developing an independent foreign policy and strategic position was a necessity for Bangladesh. After November 7, this sense of national distinctiveness gained particular importance in Ziaur Rahman’s political direction.
This was essentially a question of exercising national sovereignty. Sovereignty means more than international recognition or territorial integrity. One of its fundamental aspects is the ability to make independent decisions. A state should determine its foreign policy, security strategy, economic priorities and international partnerships according to its own interests and judgement. Bangladesh needs cooperation with neighbouring countries, but such cooperation must not turn into dependence or political subordination. This is one of the key principles of Bangladesh-centred nationalism.
The development of Bangladeshi nationalism in Ziaur Rahman’s political philosophy was an important expression of this vision. Bangladeshi nationalism sought to build a distinct national identity based on the country’s territory, Liberation War, language, history, religious and cultural traditions, and the shared experiences of its people. Alongside Bengali cultural identity, it also recognised the historical and civilisational realities of Bangladesh’s Muslim-majority society. This approach created scope for a broader, multidimensional understanding of national identity. It also carried political significance in recognising Bangladesh as a distinct nation-state.
This nationalist outlook was also reflected in foreign policy. Efforts were made to expand relations with the Muslim world, increase Bangladesh’s international presence, improve ties with China and develop diplomatic links beyond South Asia. Bangladesh’s membership in the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) in 1974 had opened up new opportunities for international engagement, which expanded further during Ziaur Rahman’s time. The proposal for South Asian regional cooperation in 1980 was also an important part of Bangladesh’s regional diplomatic legacy. These initiatives can be viewed as part of a broader effort to establish an independent position for the country.
However, the revolutionary character of November 7 cannot be assessed without considering civil-military relations. The political role of the armed forces and the relationship between military and civilian authority are crucial to a state’s stability. During the events of November 7, soldiers’ dissatisfaction, divisions within military leadership and the interaction among political forces all played important roles.
The significance of a revolutionary moment and the reality of the state that emerges afterwards are not the same. The aspirations behind a political change are not always fully realised through the new power structure. The November 7 uprising also involved both common ground and fundamental differences between the soldiers’ revolutionary aspirations, expectations of national sovereignty and Ziaur Rahman’s subsequent state initiatives. An objective assessment of history must consider both aspects.
The significance of November 7 for present-day Bangladesh is even broader. The mass uprising of 2024 once again raised questions about the political legitimacy of the state, people’s power and the freedom to make national decisions. The events of 1975 and 2024 were different in nature, but both reflected a desire for change against the existing political order. These experiences remind us that a state’s stability does not depend solely on a change of power. It also depends on political legitimacy, institutional accountability, political pluralism and public participation.
Today, reviving Bangladesh-centred nationalism means placing national interests at the heart of state policy, maintaining strategic independence in foreign affairs, strengthening economic self-reliance and promoting cultural identity. It also requires strengthening democratic institutions, judicial independence, civil rights and political pluralism. Without the people’s independent political authority, the concept of national sovereignty cannot be fully realised.
This is where the historical argument for viewing November 7 as a revolution lies. It was a moment that encouraged renewed reflection on Bangladesh’s state identity and political direction. The political consciousness of Bangladesh-centred nationalism that gained renewed strength through the events was driven by the aspiration to establish the country on the basis of its own identity and interests. To assess this aspiration, it is necessary to recognise the political limitations of November 7 while also understanding its significance as a vision of the state.
The development of Bangladeshi nationalism in Ziaur Rahman’s subsequent political philosophy was an important expression of this revival. In defining national identity, this approach considered not only the country’s linguistic and territorial heritage but also its religious and cultural traditions, history and distinct experience as an independent state. It sought to move beyond an identity based solely on language or geography and recognise Bangladesh’s diverse historical and cultural realities.
A major aspect of this revival was a new direction in foreign policy. The principle that Bangladesh’s international relations should be determined by its own national interests gained importance. Cooperation with neighbouring countries, including India, was considered necessary, but it should not restrict Bangladesh’s freedom to make independent decisions. At the same time, greater importance was attached to relations with the Muslim world, regional diplomacy and efforts to establish Bangladesh’s distinct position internationally. This approach reflected an aspiration for diversity and strategic independence in the country’s foreign policy.
A fresh assessment of November 7 is particularly important for Bangladesh today. The 2024 mass uprising once again brought questions of political legitimacy, national identity and people’s power to the forefront. The events of 1975 and 2024 were different in their social foundations, political contexts and historical character. Yet both experiences raise a common question: Who has the right to determine the future of Bangladesh, and on what principles should that future be built?
November 7 reminds us that independence is an ongoing responsibility of the state. Bangladesh must build its future on the basis of its own history, culture, civilisational heritage and the aspirations of its people. No foreign geopolitical ambition, exclusive political control by any party or personality-centred power structure can serve as a substitute for the country’s national identity.
The author is a poet, researcher and Islamic thinker.
