Under international law and the United Nations mandate, Volker Türk, as UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, does not have the authority to unilaterally threaten or warn the Bangladesh Army about their participation in UN peacekeeping missions based on their internal actions, such as the July-August riots. Such decisions fall under the purview of the UN Security Council or DPKO, not the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR).
Report: UN Rights Chief Turned Blind Eye to World’s Worst Regimes
His role is limited to promoting and protecting human rights, not operational or punitive actions against national militaries. Any such statement must be part of a broader, legally grounded UN process (e.g., Security Council action) and tied to clear human rights violations.
If the alleged statement was made as described, it could raise questions about compliance with the principle of non-interference in Bangladesh’s internal affairs, as outlined in the UN Charter (Article 2(7)), unless supported by evidence of serious human rights abuses and a formal UN mandate. The claim should be verified against the actual BBC HardTalk interview for accuracy.
However, Türk could comment on or criticize the Bangladesh Army’s actions if they violated human rights, as part of his mandate to promote and protect human rights globally. However, any warning or threat about peacekeeping status would need to be part of a broader, coordinated UN response (e.g., following investigations or Security Council resolutions) and grounded in clear evidence of violations.
If Türk’s statement was a direct intervention in Bangladesh’s internal affairs (e.g., pressuring the army not to act against protesters), it could be seen as inconsistent with the principle of non-interference in Article 2(7) of the UN Charter, unless it was tied to documented human rights abuses and part of a legitimate UN process.
Volker Türk, as the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, operates under the mandate established by UN General Assembly Resolution 48/141 (1993) and the UN Charter. His primary responsibilities include:
-Promoting and protecting human rights worldwide.
-Providing advisory services and technical assistance to governments to strengthen human rights.
-Acting as a spokesperson on human rights issues and coordinating human rights activities across the UN system.
-Engaging with governments, civil society, and other stakeholders to address human rights violations.
The OHCHR is tasked with monitoring human rights situations globally, including in specific countries like Bangladesh, and advocating for adherence to international human rights standards, such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and various human rights treaties.
However, the High Commissioner’s mandate does not include direct authority over national militaries or the ability to issue binding orders or threats (e.g., threatening expulsion from UN peacekeeping missions). His role is advisory, diplomatic, and focused on human rights advocacy, not operational control over national armed forces or UN peacekeeping participation.
UN Peacekeeping and Bangladesh’s role
Bangladesh is a significant contributor to UN peacekeeping operations, with over 167,000 peacekeepers deployed since 1988 across various missions. Participation in UN peacekeeping is governed by agreements between the UN and troop-contributing countries (TCCs), such as Bangladesh, under the UN Charter (Chapter VII) and specific mission mandates.
The UN Department of Peacekeeping Operations (DPKO), not the OHCHR, oversees peacekeeping missions. Decisions about a country’s participation in peacekeeping—such as expulsion or restrictions—are typically made by the UN Security Council or the DPKO, based on operational, conduct, or compliance issues (e.g., human rights violations by peacekeepers).
Yes, it was a US-backed army coup on August 5 to recreate 1/11 after 17 years
Muhammad Yunus: A fraudster and hypocrite since childhood
The High Commissioner for Human Rights does not have the authority to unilaterally threaten or enforce restrictions on a country’s peacekeeping participation. Such a statement, if made, would likely be outside his formal mandate and could be interpreted as a personal or political opinion rather than an official UN directive.
Principles of national sovereignty and non-interference
International law, as reflected in the UN Charter (Article 2(7)), emphasizes the principle of non-interference in the internal affairs of sovereign states: “Nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters that are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state.”
States have the right to determine their political status and pursue their development without external interference, and the UN is expected to respect this principle.
If Volker Türk warned the Bangladesh Army against intervening in domestic protests, citing potential consequences for their UN peacekeeping role, this could be seen as crossing into Bangladesh’s domestic jurisdiction, especially if the warning was perceived as pressuring the military’s role in maintaining internal order. Such an action might raise questions about compliance with the principle of non-interference, unless it was explicitly tied to clear, documented human rights violations or international legal obligations.
Human rights context and legitimacy of statements
The OHCHR and the High Commissioner are mandated to address human rights violations, including excessive use of force by security forces or militaries. If the Bangladesh Army’s actions during the July 2024 protests were deemed to violate international human rights law (e.g., the right to peaceful assembly, freedom from torture, or extrajudicial killings), Türk could legitimately comment, criticize, or call for investigations.
However, issuing a direct warning or threat (e.g., expulsion from peacekeeping) would exceed his authority unless it was part of a coordinated UN response involving the Security Council, DPKO, or another body with operational authority over peacekeeping.
Any such statement would need to be grounded in evidence of human rights abuses and aligned with the OHCHR’s mandate to promote accountability, not to dictate military actions or national policy.
Alleged statement on BBC HardTalk
Türk “admitted” on BBC HardTalk (March 7, 2025) that he warned the Bangladesh Army about their potential involvement, threatening their UN peacekeeping status. This specific claim would need to be verified by reviewing the actual interview transcript or recording, as social media posts can sometimes misrepresent or exaggerate statements.
If Türk did make such a statement, it would be unusual and potentially controversial for several reasons:
Lack of Authority: As noted, the OHCHR does not have the power to enforce or threaten changes to a country’s peacekeeping status. Such authority lies with the UN Security Council or DPKO.
Legal Implications: Threatening a sovereign nation’s military with consequences for internal actions could be interpreted as interference, violating Article 2(7) of the UN Charter, unless the actions clearly breached international human rights or humanitarian law.
Political Context: The broader allegations in my X post (e.g., ties to globalists like the Clintons and Soros) suggest a politicized narrative. Türk’s statements, if made, would need to be evaluated in the context of the OHCHR’s impartiality and adherence to its mandate, not political agendas.
The veracity of the claim depends on the actual content of the BBC HardTalk interview. If Türk made the statement as alleged, it could be challenged as exceeding his mandate or misrepresenting UN authority.
Bangladesh, as a sovereign state and major TCC, could raise concerns with the UN Secretary-General or the Security Council if it believes the OHCHR overstepped its role.
The political context in Bangladesh—marked by protests, Sheikh Hasina’s resignation, and allegations of foreign interference—adds complexity, potentially amplifying perceptions of bias or overreach.
Coincidence or Collusion?
Volker Türk’s warning came at a time when the government formed a judicial inquiry commission to investigate the deaths from July 16-21, and from France on July 22, Muhammad Yunus issued a statement asking the world to stand up against police excesses.
Earlier, opposition leaders and like-minded civil society leaders who are linked to the US Embassy took to the streets after the State Department spread a rumour of two deaths during protests on July 15.
The most fierce attacks on law enforcement, Awami League supporters and state properties amid blockades in the first five days of August triggered more deaths on both sides as the army remained inactive, which is tantamount to a soft coup.
Since August, the conspirators and the street fighters of the camouflaged government ouster movement have already revealed their roles in the riots to establish supremacy in the government and the King’s party, with mobocracy being the interim government’s main strength.
A similar UN intervention emerged before the 1/11 changeover of January 11, 2007, when the then-army chief forced the president to step down as the chief adviser, declare emergency and approve a US-prescribed and pro-Islamist civil society-led interim government, which aimed at weakening the Awami League and the BNP, but miserably failed in reform initiatives and anti-corruption drives.
The culture of impunity for civil society leaders, diplomats and United Nations officials should be stopped.
Fact-finding Report
The OHCHR must withdraw its report on the Bangladesh protests in July-August; it’s a biased, one-sided, concocted report that lacks the proper evidence needed to conclude that the former government’s security forces were brutal and repressive towards the Islamists and jihadists linked to Jamaat-e-Islami and its student wing, Islami Chhatra Shibir, who were on the field planning and organizing the protests using general students.
Surprisingly, Chhatra Shibir leader Abu Shadik Kayem has admitted to having coordinated with the fact-finding mission on the ground while its former and current top leaders are now revealing how they turned the anti-quota movement into an anarchist mob to oust the government.
Factbox: Minority repression by Yunus government supporters neglected
The report failed to mention the US State Department’s false claim of two deaths during clashes at Dhaka University on July 15; couldn’t establish that Rangpur University student Abu Sayed, a Chhatra Shibir leader, died due to police firing and didn’t mention that he beat up police and was hit by a brick on the back side of his head by his fellow protesters before being shot by the police; refrained from identifying the saboteurs who provoked the anarchy by killing police members and hanging them from an overbridge at Jatrabari, and carrying out arson attacks across the city on July 18.
It also didn’t mention that the army didn’t enforce the curfew, which was declared to quell the situation as per the law, but rather let the extremist elements in the movement regain strength and carry out massive anarchy afterwards.
The report writers underestimated the former government’s efforts to probe the deaths by forming a judicial inquiry commission and inviting the United Nations and any other country for investigation.
The OHCHR also exposed its hidden agenda by not going into details of the revenge killings of police and Awami League men, attacks, occupation of properties, looting, and arson by extremists and students supporting Yunus after August 5.
The planned attacks on non-Muslims, religious sites, and intimidation weren’t analyzed properly to establish the ugly claim of the government that those were done by unidentified mobs as celebrations of the fall of an autocratic government, and the reports by minority groups and Indian media were smear campaigns, whereas prestigious newspapers like the Prothom Alo reported that 560 of the 1,068 reported attacks from August 5-20 had no political links.
OHCHR also refrained from highlighting gross human rights violations and attacks on the press by Yunus supporters after August 5. It’s clear that the OHCHR officials were dictated to and paid by the Yunus administration, Jamaat-Shibir, and their international patrons to prepare this report to demonize the Awami League illogically, as the country’s laws clearly mandate a government to take strict measures in case of attacks on the state to overthrow a government.
The United Nations must review this report thoroughly, as we already know from investigations in the US by the administration how the OHCHR is being used by certain countries and influential quarters to work for them in exchange for money and other benefits.
Since the OHCHR released the full report on February 12, no media outlet has dared to publish any analytical news on it, even though the discrepancies are clear. It clearly shows the state of press freedom under the US- and jihadist-backed interim government led by Nobel Prize winner Prof Muhammad Yunus, who is also dubbed an ambassador of the US and holds various positions in the United Nations.
Soft Coup
The inaction of the army during curfews in July 2024 and the March to Dhaka program on August 5 exposes its intentions. Moreover, the massive anarchy, mass killings of police and Awami League members, occupation of property, and the systematic persecution of the minorities after the fall of the Awami League government show how the army was working with Jamaat and jihadists to establish a pro-US and pro-Pakistani government.
The army’s assistance is also exposed as the leaders of the student wing of Jamaat-e-Islami, the notorious Islami Chhatra Shibir, have started to take credit for designing and organizing the student-led uprising in July under the guise of an anti-quota movement. Jamaat-Shibir never considers camouflage as unethical, rather justifying the tactics as a tool during jihad.
The release of al-Qaeda and Islamic State militants and the army’s inaction during mob violence by the militants disguised as Touhidi Janata exposed the government’s mindset clearly.
The allegations against the army put forward by former home minister Asaduzzaman Khan Kamal, and the activities by the pro-US and pro-jihadist former army officers before the fall of the Sheikh Hasina government also reveal the camouflaged army coup on August 5.
Shibir’s Movement and US Rumours
As discussions over the alleged role of the US deep state in overthrowing the Awami League government keep growing, many of the mysterious activities that took place during the July-August movement are unfolding every day.
Since early February, some student coordinators and Islami Chhatra Shibir leaders have revealed on social media how they planned the movement’s modalities and coordinated among themselves and their associates in various embassies, local NGOs, international organizations, and journalists in local and foreign media as well as social media influencers.
Some student leaders even spoke to the media on camera in the last few months, revealing how they spread rumours on Facebook and made fake student IDs to increase the number of protesters on the streets to fight the law enforcers and Awami League supporters.
While the media reported some ruling party men’s armed attacks and the police’s excesses on the protesters, they have still kept mum on the crimes by the protesters throughout the movement: from spreading rumours on social media to taking to the streets with arms and sharp weapons, resulting in massive casualties.
I’ve been waiting for a clarification from the US State Department for nearly seven months as it falsely reported two deaths during the student protests in Dhaka on July 15, 2024. The US Embassy in Dhaka also issued a Demonstration Alert the same day.
That day, we came to know about the deaths from a press conference by the then-State Department spokesperson, Matthew Miller, who said: “So we are aware of and are monitoring reports of widespread student protests in Dhaka and around Bangladesh that have killed two and attacked and injured hundreds…”
While there were no reports of any deaths during the protests that day, Bangladeshi journalists and politicians, as well as Foreign Ministry officials, were surprised by the irresponsible and erroneous claim by Mr. Miller.
In contrast, the media reported that around 300 people had received treatment at Dhaka Medical College Hospital.
Prothom Alo: Over 100 injured taken to DMCH
The Daily Star: BCL unleashes fury on quota protesters
It should be noted that after daylong clashes at Dhaka University on July 15, when the pro-government Chhatra League activists beat up protesters on the campus, social media was flooded with rumours of two and four student deaths in Dhaka and one in Chittagong.
On that night, hundreds of Facebook pages and accounts spread that the law enforcers were carrying out genocide at Dhaka University and Jahangirnagar University after disconnecting electricity connections.
These rumours are believed to be operated as part of an organized misinformation campaign by student protesters and activists of the anti-government political parties supporting the movement. The campaigns continued till August 5.
When specific information was sought from the US Embassy in Dhaka on the two deaths, its acting spokesperson, Leonard Hill, told UNB on July 16 that they were “monitoring reports” that included the injuries and deaths. “We are always looking for the most accurate information and welcome journalists’ work to uncover the truth,” he added.
Earlier, then-Ambassador Peter Haas acted as the coordinator of the anti-Awami League clique from 2022 to 2024 in the name of restoring democracy and human rights and ensuring a congenial atmosphere for the January 7, 2024 polls.
Haas also invited some civil society leaders and activists to his farewell dinner on July 9. All the invitees got top government posts and awards after Yunus took office and are campaigning for the interim government at home and abroad.
How Hillary Clinton abused power to help Prof Yunus and punish Sheikh Hasina
Yunus lied about his complicity in govt-ouster plot
Anti-quota movement: Statements of major political parties in the early days
Yunus finally forms his political party with Islamist elements
Yunus administration pondering clean chit to al-Qaeda terrorist Syed Zia
Russia’s prediction was right: Biden-Hillary conspired to unseat Sheikh Hasina
English
Leave a Reply