The Authoritarian Challenge to Democracy in 2024: A GREAT POLITICAL RESET

Democracy faces its gravest test worldwide, grappling with the oppressive rise of authoritarian rulers. In many nations, including Bangladesh, institutions have been systematically dismantled, leaving behind a hollow shell of governance. Basic human rights have been stripped away, while governments, intoxicated by their own power, blatantly disregarded public opinion and the voice of the electorate. Instead, they imposed their will through decrees, turning their directives into law without consultation or consent. Yet, in 2024, this façade of invincibility began to crumble.

Authoritarian regimes faltered as they confronted an awakened populace. In dramatic fashion, many of these rulers were forced to flee—not with formal farewells, but like fugitives in the dead of night. The very masses they once suppressed rose in defiance, forcing those in power to abandon their thrones. Initially defiant, these leaders clung to their illusions of control. However, when the tides turned, they found themselves alone—abandoned by the very enforcers who once protected them. The question arises: who drove these powerful figures to such ignoble retreats? The answer is clear. It was none other than the oppressed, the disenfranchised, the silenced citizens who had endured decades of neglect.

In Bangladesh, one poignant example, the regime’s hubris led to its downfall. Some rulers, confident in their alliances, declared their significance to neighboring powers like India, asserting that their contributions would forever ensure loyalty. However, these alliances could not shield them from the tidal wave of public outrage. Across nations like Syria, Myanmar, and Chad, authoritarian governments systematically robbed their people of electoral rights. In these regimes, freedom became a privilege reserved for the elite, leaving the majority to suffer under autocratic control.

Over the past year, a series of significant political upheavals unfolded globally. Countries long dominated by dictators witnessed resounding defeats at the hands of rights activists and grassroots movements. In nations where voting rights remained intact, citizens used their ballots as weapons to overthrow entrenched autocracies. The world bore witness to a dramatic reversal: once-powerful leaders ousted by the very systems they sought to manipulate.

In Bangladesh, January’s election was emblematic of a farcical democracy. Though several parties nominally participated, the reality was starkly different. Most of these parties operated under the ruling government’s shadow, reaping token rewards in exchange for compliance. The West, including the United States, dismissed the elections as neither free nor fair. Voter turnout was meager, reflecting widespread disillusionment.

As international media like The Economist, The New York Times, and The Guardian highlighted, the ruling government, led by Sheikh Hasina, epitomized authoritarianism. Over her 15-year rule, Hasina’s administration sowed deep resentment among the populace. This simmering anger erupted in July and August 2024, culminating in a historic student-led movement. The government, blindsided by the scale and intensity of the protests, crumbled under pressure. On August 5, Sheikh Hasina fled to India, leaving behind a legacy of suppression and mistrust.

Even her final moments in Bangladesh were steeped in chaos. Reports suggest she intended to address the nation, but events unfolded too rapidly to allow it. A lavish buffet, prepared for her departure, remained untouched as she hastily exited the country. Her flight resembled a scene from a nightmare—a desperate escape fueled by the fear of retribution. In doing so, she severed ties with Bangladesh’s political landscape, potentially marking the end of her career.

International observers and political analysts have drawn grim conclusions. Former Indian High Commissioner Pinak Ranjan Chakravarty commented on the unlikelihood of Sheikh Hasina’s return to politics. Her rhetoric of serving the people, once central to her public persona, was contradicted by the reality of her fall. The very people she claimed to represent—those who, according to her narrative, elected her out of unwavering loyalty—ultimately drove her out. On August 4 and 5, thousands of citizens, defying fear and repression, took to the streets with unparalleled courage.

A parallel tale of decline unfolded for Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, mirroring the dramatic exit of Bangladesh’s Sheikh Hasina. As fascist Hasina’s plane took off for India, whispers of her flight spread rapidly, solidifying into confirmed news. In Assad’s case, however, the air was rife with speculation, thick with rumors and uncertainty. Some claimed he had been killed; others suggested he had sought refuge in Russia, while a few even speculated that his plane had met a fiery end in a crash. The truth emerged a day later: Assad had indeed fled to Russia, where he was granted political asylum.

This revelation left the world questioning: How did a man who had clung to power for nearly two and a half decades come to such an ignoble end? Did he take a cue from Hasina’s swift departure, realizing that the tides of history had turned against him? Or was his downfall a culmination of unique pressures tied to the shifting dynamics of global power? What stands out is that 2024 has been a year of seismic political transformations, driven in part by the United States’ presidential election.

Donald Trump’s victory in the U.S. election on November 5 sent shockwaves through the global political landscape. His return to the White House did not merely signal a change in American leadership but also initiated a cascade of repercussions for the world’s political, economic, and military systems. Trump’s foreign policy priorities, particularly his pivot toward Russian President Vladimir Putin, reshaped the geopolitical order. By calling for an expedited end to the war in Ukraine and signaling a reduction in U.S. aid to the embattled nation, Trump inadvertently altered the equations sustaining authoritarian regimes.

For Assad, these shifts were devastating. The lifeline he had relied on—support from Russia and China—began to fray. Trump’s overtures to Putin suggested a retreat from the costly entanglements of global conflict, leaving Assad vulnerable and exposed. The once-mighty patronage that propped up his regime began to wane, forcing him to face an uncomfortable truth: his hold on power was unsustainable.

Assad’s plight is emblematic of a broader lesson in the lifecycle of dictatorships. Such regimes rarely derive their legitimacy from the will of the people. Instead, they depend on a fragile network of external support and internal coercion. When the pillars of that support weaken or collapse, the façade of power crumbles rapidly. The protectors of these regimes—be they foreign allies or domestic enforcers—often abandon ship the moment the costs outweigh the benefits. In Assad’s case, as in many others, the loss of international backing exposed the hollow foundations of his rule.

The impact of these geopolitical shifts extended far beyond Syria. Trump’s election rattled not only Assad but also authoritarian regimes in other regions, and even reverberated through India. The power dynamics of the world’s superpowers shifted dramatically, leaving smaller, autocratic states scrambling to adapt. For Assad, these changes spelled the end of his decades-long reign, an outcome as inevitable as it was dramatic.

In retrospect, Assad’s downfall serves as a stark reminder of the transient nature of autocratic power. Dictators often rise through a combination of force, manipulation, and strategic alliances, but they rarely consider the impermanence of such arrangements. The hands that empower them are the same hands that can withdraw support when it becomes politically expedient. Assad’s flight to Russia is not just the story of a single ruler’s fall but a chapter in the larger narrative of authoritarian fragility.

As the dust settles on 2024, the world observes the unraveling of despots who once seemed unassailable. Assad’s exit underscores a profound truth: no regime can indefinitely suppress the will of its people or withstand the shifting sands of global politics. The fate of dictators is sealed not by their strength, but by the precarious alliances and coercive systems upon which they build their thrones.

Across the globe, many authoritarian regimes cloak themselves in the guise of civility and representation, claiming legitimacy while evading accountability. These regimes operate either as direct military dictatorships or through shadow governments under military influence. Pakistan serves as a prime example of such dynamics. Its current government, widely regarded as a beneficiary of military endorsement, exemplifies the complexities of veiled authoritarianism.

The February 8 election in Pakistan was a theater of political maneuvering. Former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, previously convicted and sentenced by the courts, was permitted to return to the country shortly before the polls. Meanwhile, the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), led by former Prime Minister Imran Khan, was strategically sidelined, effectively excluding one of the most influential political forces in the nation. This orchestrated outcome ensured that power remained concentrated between the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) and the Pakistan People’s Party (PPP). The real puppet masters behind this arrangement, however, are evident to even casual observers—the military’s influence looms large, dictating the political script.

This year has seen a sharp increase in the cost of living across many nations, fueling economic discontent and intensifying migration pressures. Governments worldwide have been forced to confront unprecedented challenges, with some succumbing to the weight of popular disapproval. The ripple effects of these crises have unseated numerous regimes and disrupted political stability.

In Iceland, for instance, the ruling Independent Party was defeated by the centrist Social Democratic Alliance. This political shift is emblematic of broader global trends where economic hardships are not only altering governance but also reshaping demographics and societal priorities. Electoral outcomes are increasingly tied to the mounting economic burdens faced by ordinary citizens, reflecting a collective demand for change.

Turning to the United States, the political landscape there is no less turbulent. After President Joe Biden announced his decision not to seek reelection, Vice President Kamala Harris emerged as the Democratic Party’s candidate. However, she suffered a decisive defeat at the hands of the highly polarizing and controversial Donald Trump. This outcome underscores the deepening divisions within American society, where political polarization continues to escalate.

The social and economic tensions fueling this division are multifaceted. Immigration remains a contentious issue, exacerbating existing economic strains and contributing to cultural clashes. Meanwhile, Trump’s presidency, fraught with scandals and accusations—including alleged connections to a sex worker and his role in the January 6 Capitol Hill riots—did not deter his core supporters. Instead, his brand of divisive politics resonated with a significant portion of the electorate, propelling him back into power.

Trump’s victory is poised to reshape the global order. As the leader of the United States, often regarded as the most powerful individual in the world, his policies will inevitably have far-reaching consequences. His promises of imposing tariffs have already sparked discontent in Mexico, Canada, and China, signaling a turbulent road ahead in international trade relations.

The events of 2024 illustrate a global political environment in flux. From the veiled authoritarianism in Pakistan to the economic upheavals across Europe, and the divisive return of Donald Trump to power in the United States, a pattern of unrest and transformation is emerging. These developments highlight the fragility of political systems under pressure and the profound impact of leadership choices on the international stage.

As nations grapple with these challenges, one truth becomes evident: the illusion of representation cannot sustain authoritarian regimes indefinitely, and economic distress often acts as the catalyst for profound political change. In this era of global transformation, the interplay between power, accountability, and public discontent continues to shape the course of history.

In Britain, the Conservative Party’s decade-long hold on power unraveled in dramatic fashion. Internal discord and mounting controversies led to a rapid succession of prime ministers, each struggling to stabilize a fractured government. Amid this turmoil, Labour Party leader Keir Starmer emerged as a beacon of hope, pledging transformative change. Starmer’s message resonated deeply with a disillusioned electorate, culminating in a resounding defeat for the Conservatives. The political landscape of the United Kingdom was irrevocably altered, ushering in a new era under Labour’s stewardship.

The year witnessed unprecedented political reckonings worldwide, with high-profile arrests of rulers underscoring a shift in accountability. In South Africa, the African National Congress (ANC), long a dominant force since the fall of apartheid, faced an electoral debacle. For the first time in decades, the ANC lost its parliamentary majority, as widespread frustration with corruption and ineffective governance galvanized voters to support a coalition of opposition parties. This dramatic change marked a significant turning point in South Africa’s political narrative.

In Japan, the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP), which had governed post-war Japan for generations, suffered a similar fate. Rising public dissatisfaction with the stagnant economy and the government’s inability to address demographic challenges culminated in a resounding loss of their parliamentary majority. The election results reflected a growing disillusionment among citizens, forcing the LDP to reckon with a diminished role in the nation’s political framework.

France, too, experienced political turbulence. President Emmanuel Macron, in a surprising move, called for early parliamentary elections, a gamble that backfired spectacularly. His party lost its majority, paving the way for a coalition of left- and right-wing parties to seize power. This coalition capitalized on widespread dissatisfaction with Macron’s contentious reforms, reshaping the French political landscape and challenging the president’s ability to govern effectively.

India’s Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, secured a historic third term in office but faced a significant setback by losing its parliamentary majority for the first time in a decade. This shift was largely attributed to the resurgence of the Congress Party, under the dynamic leadership of Rahul Gandhi and Priyanka Gandhi. The Gandhis’ rejuvenation of Congress infused new energy into Indian politics, positioning the party as a formidable force and casting doubt over Modi’s ability to maintain his stronghold on the nation.

In Senegal, a similar narrative unfolded. President Macky Sall’s coalition, long a dominant player in the country’s political scene, was unseated in the presidential election. Opposition leader Basiru Diomaye Faye emerged victorious, reflecting growing discontent with the ruling government. This marked a new chapter in Senegalese politics, underscoring the power of grassroots movements and voter mobilization.

The political upheavals of this year have highlighted a universal theme: voters’ growing impatience with corruption, stagnation, and unfulfilled promises. From Britain to Senegal, the rejection of entrenched power structures has paved the way for new leadership and, in some cases, fragile coalitions. These global shifts underscore a broader demand for accountability, transparency, and governance that prioritizes the needs of the people over political elites.

As these developments continue to unfold, the world stands at a crossroads. The rise of opposition movements, the fall of once-dominant parties, and the reshaping of political alliances signal an era of profound change. It remains to be seen how these new leaders will address the challenges they have inherited and whether they can deliver on the promises that propelled them to power. The road ahead is uncertain, but one thing is clear: the political status quo is no longer an option for a rapidly evolving world.