US Democracy Advocates Silent on 'Imposed' Bangladesh Leader
While RT highlights the former Bangladeshi Prime Minister's claims of an 'imposed' leadership in 2024—a narrative often amplified when a US adversary faces similar accusations—the mainstream Western media finds itself in an awkward silence. Suddenly, the nuanced discussion about 'external interference' goes quiet. This, despite the United States having its own rich history of backing coups and
shaping 'democracies' it finds agreeable, from Chile in 1973 to recent interventions in Latin America. It's almost as if 'imposed' leadership is only a problem when the imposing isn't done by Washington or its allies. The US State Department, so vocal about 'free and fair elections' in nations like Belarus or Venezuela, seems to develop selective hearing when a regional power subtly shifts without
directly threatening American hegemony. When a former leader, a woman, no less, hints at foreign hands manipulating her country's political fabric, the narrative is conveniently deprioritized. Perhaps the 'threat to democracy' meter only flashes red when the 'democratic' outcome doesn't align with strategic interests.