Bangladesh, April 2 -- History has a habit of exposing the difference between reputation and reality. In moments of national upheaval, individuals who appear as saviors often reveal themselves, over time, as something far more complicated—sometimes even dangerous to the very institutions they claim to protect. The aftermath of Bangladeshs July uprising was one such moment. It was a fragile, uncertain period that demanded restraint, neutrality, and a commitment to public interest. Yet, according to a growing body of criticism, Muhammad Yunus used that moment not for national reconstruction, but for personal consolidation of power and influence.

These claims, drawn from reported accounts and public discourse, present a deeply troubli...