Fallen Forces or New Game? Questions Behind the Recent IED Discoveries Is Someone Trying to Destabilise the New Government?

Fallen Forces or New Game? Questions Behind the Recent IED Discoveries

Is Someone Trying to Destabilise the New Government?

On the evening of 30 July 2026, a man in his early thirties entered a small grocery shop in the Khejur Bagan area of Ashulia. He asked for a soft drink, handed over a large note, and left when the shopkeeper went looking for change. Before disappearing, he placed a locked bag on a bench outside. Hours later, suspicious locals forced the bag open. Inside was a pressure cooker tightly wrapped in black adhesive tape, packed with explosive compound and bearing balls. It was designed to kill and maim. The police Bomb Disposal Unit later destroyed it in a controlled explosion.

Just a week earlier, on 24 July, another sophisticated improvised explosive device (IED) was found beneath Motijheel Metro Rail Station. Concealed inside an abandoned umbrella, the pipe bomb contained sulphur, bearing balls, batteries and a circuit rigged to detonate if the umbrella was opened. A reverse Rath Yatra procession was passing nearby at the time. One passer-by was injured during the controlled disposal.

Two advanced IEDs in public places within days of each other. Both recovered before detonation. Both left by unidentified individuals who vanished into the crowd.

The method evokes darker chapters. In August 2005, Jama’atul Mujahideen Bangladesh (JMB) detonated nearly 500 bombs almost simultaneously across 63 of the country’s 64 districts within roughly thirty minutes. Government buildings, courts and public places were targeted. Leaflets demanding Islamic rule were left at many sites. Two people were killed and more than a hundred injured, but the psychological impact was enormous.

Yet today’s pattern is different. The 2005 attacks were nationwide, highly coordinated, and publicly claimed by the militant group Jama'atul Mujahideen Bangladesh (JMB). The serial bombings of 17 August 2005 triggered widespread fear and were widely seen as an attempt to undermine public confidence in the government's ability to maintain security. The 2026 devices are isolated, carefully constructed for maximum local damage, and abandoned rather than detonated in a timed wave. No group has claimed responsibility. No leaflets. No manifesto. Only silent placement and disappearance.

The timing is different too. The election is over. The BNP is in power. Soon after the new government assumed office, such explosive devices have appeared in the capital and its outskirts, raising serious concern. The question arises—are these merely a resurgence of militant activity, or is there a deeper political calculation at work?

Awami League, other opposition forces, or some foreign power—who is behind this?

Is the fallen Awami League looking for opportunities to stage militant dramas? Does it want to show the people that the situation has become worse than before? After losing power, is it attempting to destabilise the new government through such provocative activities?

Or is this a strategy of other opposition parties or groups? Are they trying to demonstrate that the BNP government has failed to ensure public security? Is the plan to expose weaknesses in the new administration’s law-and-order management and create distrust among the people?

Or is something more complex at play—a foreign power or regional interest group seeking to muddy Bangladesh’s internal situation?

Pressure-cooker bombs and umbrella IEDs require a degree of technical knowledge and access to materials. Leaving them in busy commercial and transit zones suggests an intent less focused on striking high-value targets and more on terrorising ordinary people while highlighting vulnerabilities in the government’s security apparatus. The timing—post-election and close to a religious procession—adds another layer of ambiguity.

Bangladesh has lived through cycles of political violence and militant resurgence. The 2005 serial bombings forced a reckoning with domestic extremism. Today’s incidents are smaller in scale, yet more unsettling precisely because they feel both familiar and altered. Had they exploded, the devices could have caused serious casualties. That they did not is thanks to alert citizens and rapid police response. That they existed at all demands clearer answers than silence.

For the new government, the real test now is how quickly and transparently it can investigate these incidents and bring those responsible to account. Otherwise, a perception may take root that law and order is once again slipping out of control. Until the perpetrators are identified and the motive established, the question will linger: is this the beginning of a new campaign, a calculated provocation designed to put pressure on the new government, or something else entirely still taking shape in the shadows?