Saikat Arif- Photo :Collected

By Rudro Al Muttakin

DHAKA, July 28, 2025 (BSS) – Saikat Arif, General Secretary of Bangladesh Students’ Federation, was actively involved in the 2018 quota reform movement and later played a significant role in the anti-fascist student mobilizations. His leadership was particularly pivotal during the July 2024 uprising.

Born and raised in Naogaon Sadar, Saikat studied at Namazgarh Gausul Azam Kamil Madrasa before completing higher secondary from Naogaon College. He earned his postgraduate degree in English Literature from Dhaka College. His father is Md. Moazzem Hossain, and his mother is Sandhya Akhter.

In an exclusive interview with Bangladesh Sangbad Sangstha (BSS), Saikat Arif reflects on his involvement in the Anti-Discrimination Student Movement, the challenges they faced, and the vision they carried.

BSS: In 2023, the Anti-Fascist Student Unity was formed, and you were one of the organizers. Can you tell us the backstory?
Saikat Arif: Shortly after I entered student politics, the Shahbagh Ganajagaran Mancha emerged. Then came the Shapla Chattar incident. We saw how Bangladesh’s electoral system was destroyed in 2014, when the Awami League held an election without the opposition. Since then, voting rights have been systematically taken away. It became clear to us that a fascist system was being entrenched. Signs of this were already visible after the Awami League's 2009 majority. When they rigged the 2018 election, we realized we were failing to resist. The core political agenda became: how do we fight fascism and take on Sheikh Hasina’s regime?
But internal divisions among political groups — between leftists, Islamists, and others — prevented unified resistance. We understood that defeating fascism required a broad-based coalition. So, we formed the Anti-Fascist Student Unity, reaching out to all student organizations — leftist, Islamist, democratic, and progressive. Some joined, some didn’t. But it was a necessity of time.

BSS: You were active on the streets long before the July uprising. What do you think would have happened if the Anti-Discrimination Student Movement failed?
Saikat Arif: The uprising that began in July offered no turning back. Initially, it started over the quota issue — it wasn't aimed at toppling the government. But the regime’s brutal repression transformed it into a full-scale uprising. For the first 15 days, it was a student-led protest. But when the state’s violence escalated — with the July 15 attacks at Dhaka University and Jahangirnagar — even the general public joined. The photo of Abu Sayeed with his arms outstretched on July 16 shattered the nation’s fear.
Had this movement failed, fascism would have been institutionalized more aggressively. Sheikh Hasina would have used state power to wipe out those of us who’ve been fighting since 2018. During the movement, there were direct attempts to kill and detain key leaders. If the regime had survived, many of us wouldn't be here.

BSS: Were the Student League or state intelligence agencies monitoring or threatening you and other leaders of the Students’ Federation?
Saikat Arif: From the beginning, many central leaders stayed in the background. Especially those of us known from anti-fascist movements. The frontlines were led by second-tier leaders — like Umama Fatema from Dhaka University, Sima Akter, and grassroots leaders from Narayanganj and Tangail.
We worked behind the scenes — coordinating, providing support, and ensuring movement logistics. The threats were extreme. There were moments when we feared being killed if caught. After July 15–16, ensuring the security of our frontline organizers became crucial.
In my own hometown Naogaon, I was receiving threats from Chhatra League activists. On July 18, I was attacked in Dhaka. I had to be hospitalized. That same time, a false case was filed against my younger brother — a political tactic to pressure my family. They were actively trying to eliminate the leadership.

BSS: In July, there were calls to ban partisan student politics. What is the Students’ Federation’s stance on this? What kind of student politics do you envision?
Saikat Arif: One of the crises of the uprising — particularly after July 15 to 17 — was that communication between organizers broke down. Initially, an 8-point demand was issued, which later turned controversial. A 9-point demand included the call to ban partisan student politics.
This demand wasn’t discussed with us or other student organizations. At that time, we were focused solely on toppling Sheikh Hasina. Other debates were deferred. As for our stance — we have always said that student politics should be independent. Students should organize for themselves, not act as agents of political parties. The crisis arose because student union elections have been absent since the 1990s.
We demand regular student union elections. That would resolve many issues. If there's an attempt to ban campus-based student politics, we will resist. After the uprising, we hoped to transform student politics into a tool for student welfare, breaking the old traditions.
We told the leaders of the Anti-Discrimination Student Movement — which was the main platform of the uprising — that their statement about banning student politics created a crisis. Since all student organizations were involved in that platform, it was their responsibility to resolve it. Unfortunately, that discussion could not be materialized.

BSS: When and how did you get involved in the quota reform movement? What was your party’s initial stance?
Saikat Arif: After the June 4 court verdict on the quota issue, students started reacting. On June 4, our members joined the first protest procession at Dhaka University. By June 9, the Students’ Federation held a public meeting denouncing the verdict and urging our activists to join the movement actively. After Eid, the movement resumed its organizational momentum. From July 1, we jumped in with full force.
Many of our members acted as coordinators — centrally from Dhaka University, and locally in Tangail, Rajshahi, Jessore, Narayanganj, Barishal. We were key to mobilizing and organizing students across the country.
There was informal coordination with the Anti-Discrimination Student Movement leadership. I recall a meeting around July 11 at DU auditorium where we discussed future plans. Throughout the uprising, we were deeply involved — especially when central leaders were in jail, DB custody, or hospitals. We worked from behind to keep the movement alive.

BSS: What was your personal experience like during July 15–16?
Saikat Arif: On July 15, while a rally was happening at Raju Sculpture, I was at TSC. I heard about clashes at Bijoy 71 Hall. Our activists were marching there. Chhatra League launched a brutal attack. Many were injured, including Umama Fatema and Sima Akter.
At Dhaka Medical College, we heard more attacks were coming. We tried to evacuate injured leaders. That night, news of the Jahangirnagar University attack came in — it was horrifying. We couldn’t sleep.
From July 16, the movement turned into a full-fledged mass uprising. It grew beyond control. People from all over the country joined spontaneously. On July 18, I was again attacked by Chhatra League — I needed six stitches in the head and had fractures in all four limbs. After initial treatment, I was secretly taken to Community Hospital.
On July 19, our leader Zonayed Saki was attacked. We feared he would be killed. Luckily, local protesters rescued him and took him to a safe place.
That evening, we were told to leave the hospital — fearing a Chhatra League raid. We stayed hidden until July 20 and later took shelter at my elder sister’s house. Then I moved again, staying briefly at former student leader Abu Raihan’s house and finally at a secure hideout.
I had to change my phone number because my previous one was lost during the attack. The internet blackout made it hard to get a new SIM. For days, our communication was limited. We re-established contact with our leadership around July 24.

BSS: How do you evaluate the Anti-Discrimination Student Movement — both as a political insider and as an observer?
Saikat Arif: The Anti-Discrimination Student Movement began as a non-partisan effort with no direct political agenda. It aimed at quota reform. But due to brutal repression, it naturally evolved into an anti-fascist movement.
After July 17, many of us started saying — "No more dialogue over dead bodies. No more compromises. After so much bloodshed, the only demand left is Hasina’s resignation.
But strangely, the core coordinators never addressed why so many people took to the streets. One viral moment captured this — a girl  from Mirpur told a journalist, “I failed SSC, barely passed HSC. I will be married off soon. But I can’t sleep at night, seeing those children being killed.”
The trauma of 15 years of repression pushed people to the streets. But after the uprising, attempts were made to delegitimize the very political groups that fought fascism for years. That is tragic.
It was the political parties and activists who bore the brunt of repression, who guided the protests in the most vital districts, and who kept the movement alive. Looking back, the continuity of anti-fascist resistance was carried forward primarily by those who had been fighting since long before July. That legacy should not be erased. 

BSS: There seems to be a growing wave of anti-hegemonic sentiment in the country. What is your take on this?
Saikat Arif: At the Bangladesh Students’ Federation, we have always maintained a clear stance—we stand against all forms of hegemony. From a student perspective, we have consistently said that Bangladesh is a sovereign state, and we must resist all external influence, whether in policy-making, economic pressure, or even cultural dominance.

BSS: How do you envision a “new Bangladesh” after the July Uprising?
Saikat Arif: There is a great deal of public hope around what a new Bangladesh might look like post-July. And that hope is rooted in a struggle where many people literally risked their lives.
The vision we put forward in July was for a society free of inequality. That vision didn’t emerge suddenly—it’s the product of a long struggle. We know it will not be fulfilled overnight. But how the state takes shape now is critically important.
We want a state that guarantees equal dignity and rights for all citizens. Equality must extend to opportunity and access. In July, these principles were widely shared. We must now use that energy wisely.
At the same time, the political parties that fought against Hasina’s regime must now think seriously about the new arrangements they want to build. Take BNP’s 31-point proposal—it was presented to the public, but the pace of events in July was so rapid that we barely had time to process such proposals.
There was no real framework about what kind of reforms the state would undergo. The immediate agenda in July was clear: fight fascism.
But “fighting fascism” can mean different things to different people. A leftist might see it as a push toward radical democracy, while an Islamist might envision something very different. Liberals, too, have their own interpretations.

That’s why, in the student meetings on August 12, we, Student Federation proposed concretely implementing the aspirations of the uprising. We have said this again and again: the aspirations of this uprising vary.
To me, it means one thing. To a student from an Islamist organization, it may mean something else. To a leftist comrade, it is another idea altogether. So, the critical question becomes: what is our common ground?
Since we all worked together in the anti-inequality student movement, we can come together to define the shared goals of the July uprising and determine how far we can realistically go in achieving them.
Even if we can't fulfill every aspiration, we must clearly define what those aspirations are and how we plan to move toward them.  Unfortunately, different groups have tried to hijack the narrative—reframing the uprising to suit their own political ambitions. That has significantly harmed the potential political gains of the movement.

BSS: Do you have any memories from July that left a lasting mark on you?
Saikat Arif: There are countless memories from July—both painful and inspiring. Before I was assaulted by members of the Chhatra League, I had an encounter I’ll never forget.
We were protesting near Paltan. A middle-aged man—probably in his 40s or 50s—walked up to us. At one point, he handed me his Samsung phone and said, "Son, I can't take this anymore. I can’t bear to see these kids being murdered." And then he took out a lighter and lit his hair on fire.
I grabbed his hand just in time. That’s when I noticed that his whole body was soaked in petrol. He was about to self-immolate. We have seen such acts in other uprisings—in Myanmar, Tunisia. 
Another incident was on July 24, right after I’d been beaten. My head was stitched up, and I was wearing a cap to cover it. I was passing through Jigatola when I got stopped at a Chhatra League checkpoint.

Suddenly, a woman I’d never seen before—someone I didn’t even know—stepped in and said, “He is my son. He fell and cut his head. I am  taking him to the hospital.” That’s how I got away that day. She saved me.
Then on August 4, we heard that Shakil had been shot. The transport system was in chaos, and it was almost impossible to find vehicles. One CNG driver, when we pleaded with him, agreed to take us despite the risks. At the hospital, I stayed for about an hour. In that time, 21 people arrived—all with gunshot wounds to the head. None looked likely to survive. It was horrific.
That day changed many of us. I believe a lot of those who took part in the uprising are now grappling with real psychological trauma.

BSS: What steps has the Student Federation taken to preserve the legacy of July?
Saikat Arif: Our main goal is to ensure that the people's aspirations from July don’t get reduced to just another episode of regime change. So many gave their lives in that uprising. It cannot simply end with a transfer of power. We have been working to document the events through films, testimonies, and other media so that future generations can understand this struggle. We are also engaged in preserving the movement in other ways. Many in our organization are helping the wounded and supporting families. For us, the political dimension of this struggle is what matters most. That is what we aim to carry forward.