Muhammad

Lucknow, India – On the evening of September 4, an illuminated signboard lit up a predominantly Muslim neighbourhood in Kanpur, an industrial town in India’s northern state of Uttar Pradesh.

The signboard said: “I love Muhammad” – with a red heart standing in for the word, love.

It was the first time the mainly working-class residents in Kanpur’s Syed Nagar had put up such a sign as part of the decorations as they joined millions of Muslims around the world to celebrate Prophet Muhammad’s birthday.

The day, marked as Eid Milad-un-Nabi across South Asia, involves the faithful organising religious gatherings, Quran recitations, and sermons about the prophet’s life and teachings. At some places, the celebrations include mass processions, with people carrying posters to express their love and reverence for the prophet.

In Syed Nagar, however, as soon as the words glowed, a group of Hindu men swooped in, objecting to the celebration. Police were called in, and following a ruckus that lasted hours, the signboard was removed late that night.

Charges related to promoting enmity between different religious groups, as well as deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage the religious feelings of another community, were filed against nine Muslim men and 15 unidentified people from Syed Nagar. No arrests have been made so far.

Mohit Bajpayee, a Syed Nagar resident affiliated with a Hindu group named Sri Ramnavmi Samiti, said he had no objection to the text, ‘I love Muhammad’, but to the placement of the signboard at a place used by them for a Hindu festival.

“All religions have equal rights under the constitution,” he told Al Jazeera. “But the sign was put up at a location where our Ram Navami decorations are usually displayed. Everyone has a right to follow their religion, but new traditions should not be started in new locations.”

But the Muslim residents of Syed Nagar say the signboard was put up at a public place they converged at every year for the prophet’s birth anniversary.

“We had official permission for the decorations. Everyone has the right to practise their religion under the constitution,” said a 28-year-old resident who is one of those charged, unwilling to reveal his identity over fears of further action by the government.

MA Khan, the lawyer for the accused in Kanpur, told Al Jazeera that the Muslim men were also accused of tearing a banner of the Hindu community during the Eid Milad-un-Nabi procession on September 5.

“Many of those named were not even present in the procession,” he said.

‘Disturbing communal harmony’

Uttar Pradesh is home to 38 million Muslims – more than the entire population of Saudi Arabia – comprising nearly 20 percent of India’s most populous state. Since 2017, the politically crucial state has been governed by Yogi Adityanath, a hardline Hindu monk known for his anti-Muslim speech and policies, and a prominent politician from Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Hindu majoritarian Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).

Days later, the spark from Kanpur ignited a fire some 270km (168 miles) away, in another Uttar Pradesh town called Bareilly – headquarters of the Barelvi sect of Sunni Muslims, who number between 200 million to 300 million across the world.

On September 10, the state police registered a first information report (FIR) against nine Muslims in Bareilly, including a religious scholar, accusing them of “disturbing communal harmony” and starting a “new tradition” that threatened public order.

On September 21, Maulana Tauqeer Raza Khan, chief of a Muslim group called Ittehad-e-Millat Council (IMC) and descendant of Imam Ahmed Raza Khan, the founder of the Barelvi sect, announced a protest over the FIRs filed in Bareilly and Kanpur, and urged his supporters to gather at a ground after Friday prayers on September 26 to denounce the police action.

The district administration denied Khan permission for the rally.

On September 25, the IMC issued a statement asking people not to gather for the protest. But hours later, Khan’s supporters allegedly circulated a social media message, claiming the IMC statement was fake and aimed at defaming the Muslim body.

The next day, thousands of Muslims assembled near a famous Muslim shrine in Bareilly after the Friday prayers, holding “I love Muhammad” posters and raising slogans against the police for their action in Kanpur.

District authorities alleged that the march was unauthorised and accused some participants of pelting stones at the police and vandalising public property. The police responded with a baton charge, and arrested Khan and dozens of others, as authorities shut down the internet in the town.

In a video message recorded before his arrest, Khan said the crackdown was a targeted suppression of religious expression. “Attempts to suppress our religious sentiments will backfire,” he warned.

A day later, while speaking at an event in the state capital, Lucknow, Chief Minister Adityanath condemned the Bareilly unrest as a “well-orchestrated attempt” to disturb social harmony.

“Sometimes, people are not able to shun their bad habits easily. For that, some denting-painting is required … You saw that in Bareilly yesterday. A maulana [Muslim scholar] forgot who is in power,” he said in Hindi, without naming anyone.

The “denting-painting” soon followed, as has been the pattern with Adityanath’s crackdown on Muslims accused of disrupting public order. A banquet hall belonging to one of the accused was bulldozed by the authorities in Bareilly.

‘Government wants to instil fear’

Demolition of homes and commercial properties belonging to Muslims accused of a range of crimes has become a common practice in Uttar Pradesh and other BJP-ruled states, despite India’s top court recently banning what it called the “bulldozer justice”. Rights groups say such demolitions are a form of extralegal punishment that bypasses judicial processes and devastates families economically.

While the Uttar Pradesh government claimed the demolitions in Bareilly targeted illegally-constructed buildings, the timing and targets suggest a clear strategy of intimidation.

“Police are registering cases against Muslims across the nation to suppress their legitimate protests … The BJP government wants to instil fear so Muslims lose the courage to speak for their religious and fundamental rights,” Sumaiya Rana, daughter of the famous Urdu poet late Munawwar Rana, told Al Jazeera.

Rana herself organised a protest outside the state assembly building in Lucknow, where more than a dozen demonstrators holding “I love Muhammad” placards were briefly detained by the police.

The Association for Protection of Civil Rights (APCR), a rights group, says at least 22 FIRs have been filed across India in connection with the Muslim campaign, naming more than 2,500 individuals, with at least 89 arrested in Bareilly so far.

“Authorities have treated a slogan expressing love for the prophet as a criminal act and described it as provocative,” APCR secretary Nadeem Khan told Al Jazeera. “In many cases, the administration violated due process in registering cases and demolishing the properties of the accused, which has severe social and economic impacts on Muslim communities.”

SQR Ilyasi, a member of the All India Muslim Personal Law Board, a prominent Muslim body, stressed that peaceful protest is not illegal for any community in India. “Expressing love for the prophet is our right,” he told Al Jazeera.

Activist Vandana Mishra of the People’s Union for Civil Liberties, a rights group, said the authorities frequently allow the Hindu community to “raise religious slogans freely, while the minority faces arrest for expressing love for the prophet”.

“This contravenes the secular and democratic ethos of our constitution,” she told Al Jazeera.

Opposition parties have also criticised the Uttar Pradesh government’s actions.

The Samajwadi Party, one of the state’s biggest political forces, said it attempted to send a delegation to Bareilly to meet the victims of the police crackdown, but claimed its members were prevented. “The government talks of democracy but acts in complete disregard of it,” the leader of the opposition in the Uttar Pradesh Assembly, Mata Prasad Pandey, told reporters in Lucknow.

Lawyer Zia Jillani, who recently visited Bareilly and is representing some of the accused, told Al Jazeera that most of those arrested or facing charges “belong to the marginalised sections of society and earn on a daily wage basis”.

“For them, due to their financial incapability, pursuing and fighting legal cases against the injustices inflicted upon them is an unbearable task,” he said.

“This kind of hate politics preys on the poor, taking advantage of their vulnerability while ignoring justice and accountability.”

Muslims are protesting across India against arrests, raids and home demolitions over the phrase ‘I love Muhammad’. Al Jazeera’s Yashraj Sharma explains what happened and why religious expression is increasingly under threat under Prime Minister Modi’s government.

New Delhi, India – For the last month, Indian police have raided multiple markets and homes, arresting Muslim men in states governed by Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Hindu nationalist party. Some of their homes have been bulldozed.

The genesis of their alleged crime is common: writing, “I Love Muhammad”, a reference to Prophet Muhammad, on posters, t-shirts, or in social media posts. The authorities say the expression is threatening “public order”.

So far, at least 22 cases have been registered against more than 2,500 Muslims. At least 40 people have been arrested across multiple states governed by the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), according to the nonprofit Association for Protection of Civil Rights (APCR).

So, what is happening? How and where did this start? And is it illegal to say ‘I Love Muhammad’ in India?

What’s happening?

On September 4, Muslims living in Kanpur city of the northern Indian state of Uttar Pradesh were observing Eid al-Milad al-Nabi, the celebration of the birth of Prophet Muhammad, when a neighbourhood put up an illuminated board saying, “I love Muhammad”.

But the board, mimicking the popular “I Love New York” signage that has been copied all over the world, drew criticism from some local Hindus. Initially, their complaint alleged that the illuminated board was a new introduction to traditional festivities on the occasion, when Uttar Pradesh’s laws bar new additions to public religious celebrations. About 20 percent of Kanpur’s population is Muslim.

However, based on complaints, the police filed a case against two dozen people on much more serious charges: promoting enmity on the grounds of religion. The charge carries a punishment of up to five years in jail if the accused individual is convicted.

The Kanpur episode drew widespread criticism from Muslim political leaders, and protests against the police action spread to other states, including Telangana in southern India, Gujarat and Maharashtra in the west, and in Uttarakhand and Jammu and Kashmir in the north. The  “I love Muhammad” hoardings and writings came up across the country – from people’s social media handles to t-shirts.

Nearly 270km (168 miles) away from Kanpur, in Uttar Pradesh’s Bareilly, a group of people participating in a demonstration called by a local imam against the Kanpur arrests, violently clashed with the police on September 26.

The police hit back with a crackdown, arresting 75 people, including the imam, Tauqeer Raza, his relatives and his aides. At least four buildings belonging to the accused individuals have been bulldozed by the local authorities.

In recent years, hundreds of Indian Muslims have lost their homes to such demolitions, which are often carried out without any notice issued by authorities, or any court order. India’s Supreme Court has observed that demolitions cannot be used as a form of extra-legal punishment, warning that state authorities must give prior notice before razing any property. Yet, on the ground, that order is often not followed, say activists.

Meanwhile, dozens of other Muslims have been arrested in different states – including some in Modi’s home state of Gujarat – for social media posts and videos carrying the “I love Muhammad” slogan.

Is it illegal?

India’s constitution guarantees the freedom of religion and the right to express it. Article 25 protects every individual’s freedom to practise their religion. Citizens are also protected under Article 19(1)(a), which guarantees the right to freedom of speech and expression, unless it directly incites violence or hatred.

In the cases of people arrested as part of the “I Love Muhammad” crackdown, the police have mostly charged them under legal provisions that bar large gatherings aimed at committing “mischief”, or for acts that allegedly provoke religious tensions. However, these provisions have been applied against those arrested for social media posts, or wearing t-shirts with “I Love Muhammad” emblazoned on them.

Nadeem Khan, the national coordinator of APCR, the nonprofit that has been tracking these cases, has fought previous lawsuits against government officials for similarly targeting Muslims for social media expressions, or when their homes have been bulldozed.

Khan told Al Jazeera that authorities were carefully using legal provisions that focus not on the “I Love Muhammad” expression itself, but on alleged offences carried out by those who used the expression or protested against related police crackdowns.

“They know that there is no law that criminalises just the mere expression of ‘I Love Muhammad’,” Khan said.

Khan noted that across India, images of Hindu gods wielding their traditional weapons have long been commonplace. “These images are at every corner of the country; should it also offend or threaten all Muslims then?” he asked. “Everyone should understand that the government cannot criminalise a religion like this,” he added, referring to Islam.

Since 2014, when Modi took over the power in New Delhi, India has consistently slid in a range of international democratic indices.

Criminalising people’s right to freedom of expression and religious belief sets a deeply troubling precedent, said Aakar Patel, the chair of Amnesty International India’s board.

“Targeting people for slogans such as ‘I Love Muhammad’, which is peaceful and devoid of any incitement or threat, does not meet the threshold for criminal restriction under either Indian constitutional law or international human rights law,” Patel told Al Jazeera.

“Public order concerns must be addressed proportionately and cannot justify the blanket suppression of religious identity or expression,” he added.

“The role of the state is to safeguard rights equally, not to police expressions of belief,” said Amnesty’s Patel. “Upholding constitutional and international commitments is not optional; it is a legal obligation.”

Is there a pattern?

Critics say that the crackdown is only the latest instance of Indian Muslims facing marginalisation, violence or the targeted brunt of the law since Modi came to power in 2014.

In the past 11 years, the incidents of hate speech targeting religious minorities have skyrocketed. Documented instances of hate speech jumped from 668 in 2023 to 1,165 last year, a rise of about 74 percent. A significant majority of these incidents happened in BJP-governed states, or places where elections were upcoming.

Increasingly, local Hindu-Muslim disputes now rapidly transform into national issues, said Asim Ali, a political analyst based in Delhi.

“There is an entire ecosystem in place, from pliant media to social media organisation, to spread this hate rapidly,” said Ali. “And the law is read in such a way that any expression of religious identity, especially of Muslims, can be seen as inciting religious hatred,” he added.

After the “I Love Muhammad” episode in Kanpur, BJP leaders in Modi’s own constituency, Varanasi, put up posters saying, “I Love Bulldozer” at major intersections of the city, in a reference to the bulldozing of houses of the accused.

How does it affect young Muslims?

Rasheed Kidwai, a political analyst, said that the row over “I Love Muhammad” is “overtly very political, and not religious”.

And in India, there is growing frustration among Muslims, especially youth, where they see that one set of rules is not applied for all, when it comes to matters of cultural identity and eating habits, said Kidwai.

Several of the accused, or arrested, as part of the “I Love Muhammad” crackdown, include young adult Muslims, according to data from APCR, including those who were arrested for social media posts.

The crackdown on “I Love Muhammad” expression risks alienating young Muslim adults even more, said Ali. “In theory, everyone is already guilty and can face action for just being,” he told Al Jazeera.

“It is getting difficult to imagine what the future may hold now,” he said. “The tempo of hate is increasing day by day.”

CAMDEN, N.J. — Dwight Muhammad Qawi, the Hall of Fame fighter who took up boxing in prison and became a two-weight world champion, has died. He was 72.

Qawi’s sister, Wanda King, said he died Friday following a five-year battle with dementia.

Born Dwight Braxton in Baltimore, Qawi grew up in Camden, N.J. He competed in the boxing program at Rahway State Prison while serving a sentence for armed robbery, and turned professional at age 25 soon after his release in 1978.

In December 1981, Qawi — who legally changed his name in 1982 following his conversion to Islam — stopped Matthew Saad Muhammad in the 10th round to win the WBC light heavyweight belt. Qawi stopped Saad again eight months later, in six rounds.

After a loss to Michael Spinks, the 5-foot-7 Qawi — called “The Camden Buzzsaw” — moved up in weight and took the WBA cruiserweight title from Piet Crous in July 1985. Qawi lost the title to future heavyweight champion Evander Holyfield in a 15-rounder in July 1986.

Qawi later fought as a heavyweight, with George Foreman stopping him in seven rounds.

Qawi retired in 1998 at age 46 with a 41-11-1 record and 25 knockouts. He was inducted into the International Boxing Hall of Fame in 2004.

After his retirement from the ring, he worked as a boxing trainer, youth advocate and drug and alcohol counselor.

Hi, and welcome to another edition of Dodgers Dugout. My name is Houston Mitchell. Doesn’t it feel like Chris Taylor and Austin Barnes were released last season? No, that was this season.

Ask Jaime Jarrín

We received many questions for Jaime Jarrín, who was kind enough to take time out of his day to answer some of those questions. Deputy sports editor Ed Guzman conducted the interview by phone. Because Jarrín was the longtime Spanish-language broadcaster for the Dodgers, it seemed appropriate for a couple of the questions and answers to be in Spanish. In the case of multiple people asking the same questions, the person who asked the question first gets credit for the question. Questions without a name were asked by Guzman.

From Virgilio Del Rio: How did you prepare to become a sports broadcaster?

Jarrín: Well, before becoming a sports broadcaster, I was a newsman. I used to write news, I edited news, that was my experience. Sportscasting, I learned that when I came to this country. But back home, for four years, I was a newsman writing news, editorials and things like that.

(Follow-up question from Guzman): Once you were a broadcaster here in the States, did you ever want to broadcast games in English or were you always just focused on doing it in Spanish?

Jarrín: I always wanted to do it only in Spanish. I never really wanted to go into English-language because I thought that it was my duty to do this in Spanish. So I’m very proud to have done it all in Spanish.

From Jerry Smith of Los Angeles: You called the “Thrilla in Manila” between Muhammad Ali and Joe Frazier. What was that like?

Jarrín: It is my greatest experience doing sports because the atmosphere in Manila was unbelievable. I was there for I think it was two days before the fight and it was like a carnival there. Muhammad Ali was walking the streets around the arena, you know, promoting the fight and signing many things. And he was a great, great promoter. So it was unbelievable. And the day of the fight, it was so hot, so rainy, and the fight was held at 10 o’clock in the morning (to accommodate the international viewing audience). It was really a great, great experience.

From Alex Andrade of Paramount: How difficult or easy is it to switch from calling boxing versus calling a baseball game?

Jarrín: Well, it’s totally different. In boxing, I was the blow-by-blow announcer. So I didn’t have time to do commentary. Besides, I had a commentator with me, Mr. Cuco Conde, who was a very famous boxing promoter in Cuba.

So in my case, I just narrate the fight. In boxing, you have to follow the action through the blows that are thrown by the fighters. In baseball, you have time to describe what’s going on, you have time for anecdotes, important dates and things like that.

From Mark Layne: Do you have a favorite story about Vin Scully?

Jarrín: I was very fortunate. It was a privilege to spend so much time with him because on the road we were always together, having lunch together, then dinner at the ballpark. Same thing here in Los Angeles. We always had dinner together before the games. And to see how nice he was with everybody; he never refused to shake hands with anybody; he never refused to take a picture with anybody. He was very, very special. As a baseball announcer, as a sports announcer, he was the best of the best of all time. But as a human being, he was exceptionally beautiful.

Something very special I have to mention is the fact that when my wife passed away six years ago, he was the first one to call me and he talked to me for about 20 minutes. It was the most beautiful call I ever received.

The way that he talked about my wife, about our friendship, the way that he handled the language, his intonation, his delivery on the phone. It was really, really something very, very unique that I will never, never forget. Very touching.

Very touching.

From Paul Aist of Ventura: In your opinion, did Tommy Lasorda shorten Fernando Valenzuela’s career by overusing him?

Jarrín: In a way, probably, but it was because Fernando wanted to stay in the games. He used to tell me, “Jaime, when I start something, I like to finish that. And when I start a game, I want to finish that.” So I’m sure that Lasorda wanted to take him out earlier in many games, but he insisted on staying on.

The Baseball Hall of Fame induction ceremony is later this month for the newest class. What do you remember about your induction into the Hall of Fame in 1998?

Jarrín: I remember very well the phone call that I received from the head of the Hall of Fame in Cooperstown. Around 8 o’clock in the morning, I got a telephone call. They told me, ‘Please, Jaime, be around a telephone because probably you are going to be inducted into the Hall of Fame.’ And the telephone rang at around 9:30 in the morning. And it was the head of Cooperstown. And he said, ‘Jaime, it’s my pleasure to let you know that you have been selected to be inducted into the Hall of Fame this year along with Don Sutton and Larry Doby.’ You can imagine how excited I was.

My wife, Blanca, was standing there next to me near the phone. And she saw my face, my reaction, and she started crying. And that was really something very, very special, something that is in my heart for the rest of my life. It was very emotional. It was very, very incredible.

And then the ceremony in Cooperstown is something very unique, very special. I would say that before the ceremony, they put you with all the Hall of Famers in a room. And there were about, I would say, 25, 28-30 Hall of Famers. And to be there among them, it was, to me, like being in heaven. I couldn’t believe that I would be there next to Henry Aaron, next to Willie Mays and Sandy Koufax and Tom Seaver and all those Hall of Famers. It was something special, and that changed my life. Because before that, I was one of the many, many announcers doing baseball. But after the Hall of Fame, owners of the different ballclubs, GMs and people like that, they would look for me to take a picture, to shake my hand, to introduce themselves. So really, it was a turning point. Fantastic.

How much do you watch this year’s team?

Well, I follow every single game on TV. When I go to the ballpark, I go to the field, I go to the clubhouse, I say hello to the ballplayers. Then I go to the press box because I like to see the writers because they were so nice with me, English or Spanish. They wrote beautiful things about me, about my career. I like to see the employees at the press box. Then I stay for three, four or five innings and come home. So it’s perfect. The perfect combination. But I follow the team through TV when I am not at the ballpark, yes.

¿Qué opina usted sobre el pitcheo del equipo de esta temporada?

El pitcheo deja mucho que desear debido a las lesiones. Los Dodgers durante el invierno fueron en busca de verdaderos ases del montículo y lograron contratar a varios de ellos. Pero dos de ellos han estado lesionados todo el tiempo y eso ha desbalanceado completamente el desempeño del equipo de lanzadores.

Debido a las lesiones, también hemos tenido prácticamente cada juego en que los abridores únicamente lanzan tres o cuatro innings, máximo. Y eso ha minado mucho la fortaleza del bullpen. Y el bullpen se ha visto dismal en verdad, en lo que a potencia se debe debido al uso cotidiano prácticamente de todos los días.

Espero que en este descanso los Dodgers logren consolidar el excelente elenco de lanzadores que necesitan para poder llegar y ganar la Serie Mundial.

Hemos escuchado el cuadrangular de Kirk Gibson en la Serie Mundial en la transmisión de Vin Scully, y también en el relato de Jack Buck. Pero uno no puede encontrar el relato de ese jonrón de usted o de René Cárdenas. ¿Por qué no hay modo de escuchar ese relato?

La simple respuesta: porque en aquel entonces, lamentablemente, la estación de radio y los mismos Dodgers no se preocuparon en guardar las transmisiones. No tenemos ninguna, ninguna grabación de ninguno de los juegos de los Dodgers hasta hace pocos años. Es un misterio, en verdad. KWKW y KTNQ, las dos emisoras que estuvieron con los Dodgers en esos años, no se preocuparon en mantener grabaciones de eso. Y por eso es que no existe absolutamente nada en lo que respecta a nuestras transmisiones. Es una lástima, en verdad, pero es la realidad.

From Bruce Campbell of Los Angeles: Your wife, Blanca, died in 2019. What would you want people to know about her?

Well, you know, it was such a heavy blow to myself and my family, my two sons, Jorge and Mauricio. What can I tell you? She was such a beautiful person. She was so supportive of me. All the accolades that I have gained is thanks to her because she was behind me all the time. She never complained about my being absent because I used to travel with the Dodgers and sometimes, road trips took 16 days, 19 days. And she was so generous with people and everything.

The Jaime and Blanca Jarrin Foundation has expressed a desire to uplift underserved students by awarding scholarships to those pursuing careers specifically in law and journalism. Why those two areas?

Jaime: Jorge can answer that because he is on top of everything. He can express very well the goals of the foundation. I was very pleased when Jorge and Mauricio, along with my three grandsons, joined forces to create a foundation in order to preserve the image and the name of my wife, Blanca, who was a very generous person. So I was delighted when they told me about the project. And now, I just try to help my family as much as possible. Jorge and the rest of the family work very hard in trying to create the funds that we need for the scholarships.

Jorge Jarrín, Jaime’s son, who sat in on the interview: That’s easy, actually. You know, when we started this foundation in honor of my mom, in the back of my mind, I also knew the importance, as my father was nearing the twilight of his career, looking for a way to maintain and uphold the legacy that he has created as an immigrant coming to this country. You know, he knows the trepidation and the fear that comes naturally to an immigrant coming to a nation where he doesn’t necessarily really speak the language, doesn’t really know a lot of people, is looking to establish roots so that he can, in turn, he or she, in turn, can bring their family so that they can create a better life. So, that’s that legacy.

And when my mom passed away, I thought, this is the way to do that. Speaking selfishly for a moment, this is a way to accomplish two things. To honor the memory of my mom who created such an environment for us growing up that we never felt neglected. We never felt that we missed out on anything because my father was gone all the time. And there was no guilt. There was nothing negative along that line.

And so, knowing that my father, at this point, had been speaking to Latino homes for 60-plus years, I know how people react when they see my father for the first time, when they talk to him, when they have a chance to meet him in person. Because he represents, for many, their childhood growing up, their relationships with their parents, their grandparents, aunts and uncles. He gave them that commonality of which they can talk about together.

So, knowing that impact that he has on people, we thought it’s one thing to give scholarships. But for a lot of Latinos, to get a scholarship from Jaime Jarrin is even more special. We call them the Jarrín Scholars.

And the reason we did journalism, to get back to your original question, journalism and law, two reasons: The journalism honoring the career that my father chose to create, the path that he took. And the law, because we have been fortunate in addition to the Los Angeles Dodgers to have a long and steady career as a spokesperson for Los Defensores. Los Defensores is an organization, it is a cooperative legal marketing firm that represents a network of Spanish-speaking attorneys who are there to help people, Latinos, who don’t know the language well, who are intimidated, who may be undocumented.

But there are certain rights that they’re entitled to under the law, under the Constitution. And we try to empower Latinos to speak up for themselves, to not be afraid, to not be intimidated. So my father has had a 40-year career of being the voice of Los Defensores, too. So it only made sense that because of our association with Los Defensores that we also single out law because overall, we’re seeking to help those who are eventually going to be making decisions that affect us as a community and as a society. We want to empower them, we want to help them to be the best that they can be. Unfortunately, you look at for example the state of California, 49% of which are Latinos, and yet less than 3% Latinos pass the bar examination to become attorneys.

Less than 6% of the attorneys in the United States are Latinos. Yet it doesn’t reflect the numbers of our community in terms of its makeup of demographics, so there’s something not right here. And we’re trying to get those in a four-year college the help that they need, not only financially but because I’ve had students say to me: you saw me, you recognized me, and you’re willing to invest in my future. Because that’s what it is, it’s an investment and it’s a validation that we see them, we recognize them, we want to support them. That’s it in a nutshell.

—Thank you to Jaime Jarrín for taking time from their day to answer reader questions. The Jaime and Blanca Jarrín Foundation are having “Wine Night at the Ravine,” at the centerfield plaza in Dodger Stadium on Aug. 19. For more information and tickets, click here.

Next time

We’ll talk about Mookie Betts and the Dodgers continuing to scuffle (if they still are). Betts was benched Saturday to get a mental reset, then was moved to the leadoff spot Sunday, with Shohei Ohtani moving to the two spot. It has been a tough stretch. They score six runs, the opponent scores seven. But if they hold the opponent to two runs, the Dodgers score just once. When they hit well they don’t pitch, when they pitch well they don’t hit. And they don’t field well most of the time. Freddie Freeman was hit on the wrist by a pitch Sunday and had to leave the game. X-rays were negative, according to the Dodgers, but a wrist injury isn’t good for hitters.

Luckily for them, the Giants are playing worse, and the Padres are playing just OK.

Up next

Monday: Minnesota (David Festa, 3-3, 5.25 ERA) at Dodgers (Shohei Ohtani, 0-0, 1.00 ERA), 7:10 p.m., Sportsnet LA, AM 570, KTNQ 1020

Tuesday: Minnesota (Simeon Woods Richardson, 5-4, 3.95 ERA) at Dodgers (Yoshinobu Yamamoto, 8-7, 2.59 ERA), 7:10 p.m., Sportsnet LA, AM 570, KTNQ 1020

Wednesday: Minnesota (Chris Paddack, 3-9, 5.14 ERA) at Dodgers (Tyler Glasnow, 1-1, 3.10 ERA), 1:10 p.m., Sportsnet LA, AM 570, KTNQ 1020

*-left-handed

In case you missed it

Pitching injuries continue to be an issue in MLB. How it’s impacting pitchers at all levels

Is there a way to mitigate pitching injuries? The Rays (and Dodgers) may shed some light

New mural at Dodger Stadium honors Fernando Valenzuela

Dave Roberts gives Mookie Betts a day off as season-long slump continues

‘As lucky as we could be.’ Dodgers’ Max Muncy already recovering better than expected

Shaikin: Why the small-market Milwaukee Brewers might be America’s team

Four major questions the Dodgers face in the second half of the season

And finally

The Dodgers retire Fernando Valenzuela‘s number. Watch and listen here.

Until next time…

Have a comment or something you’d like to see in a future Dodgers newsletter? Email me at [email protected], and follow me on Twitter at @latimeshouston. To get this newsletter in your inbox, click here.

On the surface, it was a routine closed-door meeting between Bangladesh’s interim leader and Nobel laureate Muhammad Yunus and the chiefs of the country’s three armed forces, to discuss law and order.

But the May 20 meeting came amid what multiple officials familiar with the internal workings of the government described to Al Jazeera as an intensifying power struggle in Dhaka. Portrayed in both social and mainstream media in Bangladesh as a “cold war” between the armed forces and the interim administration, these tensions now threaten the future of Yunus’s role, nine months after he took charge following the ousting of former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina and the ruling Awami League.

Hasina fled to India in August 2024 amid a mass uprising against her 15-year-long rule, during which she was accused of orchestrating extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearances.

We unpack the latest tumult in Bangladesh, and what it means for the country’s fledgling efforts to return to electoral democracy.

Why are tensions mounting between the military and the government?

The Bangladesh Army has remained deployed since July 2024, following the mass protests that led to Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina’s ouster. Their continued presence was necessitated by the collapse of civilian law enforcement during the upheaval, including a nationwide police strike that left many stations abandoned and public order in disarray.

Although the police resumed operations in mid-August, the army’s presence has been maintained as part of a civil-military consensus, because of unrest in the country.

On Wednesday, Bangladesh’s army chief, General Waker-Uz-Zaman, publicly urged that national elections be held by December this year, warning that prolonged deployment of the army for civil duties could compromise the country’s defences.

According to a report by The Daily Star, General Waker told a high-level gathering at Dhaka Cantonment, “Bangladesh needs political stability. This is only possible through an elected government, not by unelected decision-makers.” The comments came during a rare address in which he delivered a 30-minute speech, followed by more than an hour of questions and answers. Officers from across the country and at Bangladeshi UN missions reportedly joined the event, both physically and virtually, in full combat uniform – a show of unity and resolve.

“The army is meant for defending the nation, not for policing … We must return to barracks after elections,” Waker was quoted in The Daily Star as saying.

His remarks indicate a difference of opinion with the Yunus administration’s stated intention of holding elections no earlier than mid-2026, to allow time for political and electoral reforms first, in order to ensure a fair election.

According to local media reports, Waker is also strongly opposed to key initiatives being considered by the interim government. On a proposed humanitarian corridor into Myanmar’s Rakhine State, he reportedly said: “There will be no corridor. The sovereignty of Bangladesh is not negotiable.” He warned that any such move could drag Bangladesh into a dangerous proxy conflict. “Only a political government elected by the people can make such decisions,” he said, according to the paper.

The army chief also voiced concern about making other decisions without an electoral mandate – including the potential foreign management of Chattogram Port, Bangladesh’s main seaport, and the launch of Starlink, Elon Musk’s satellite internet service – which he said could compromise national security. “The army will not allow anyone to compromise our sovereignty,” The Daily Star quoted him as saying.

His remarks came amid widespread speculation – still unaddressed by either the military or the government – that the Yunus administration had attempted to remove General Waker from his post last week. Though unconfirmed, the rumour has dominated public discourse and prompted questions about civil-military relations during the transitional period.

The timing, therefore, of General Waker’s assertive public statement – and its emphasis on constitutional process and national sovereignty – is widely viewed as a signal of growing unease within the military over the interim government’s expanding civilian initiatives, according to analysts.

Are there tensions with political parties as well?

Yes. Since its formation on August 8 last year, the interim government has faced escalating pressure from different sides. While the main opposition Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) insists that national elections must be held by December, the National Citizen Party (NCP) – a student-led party formed earlier this year – and several other political groups argue that sweeping reforms and the prosecution of former Awami League (AL) leaders for killings resulting from the brutal crackdown on student-led protests last year must precede any election.

Bangladesh’s largest political party, the BNP, has launched a wave of protests over other demands as well, including that its candidate, who lost an allegedly rigged mayoral election in Dhaka on February 1, 2020, under the Awami League regime, be reinstated as mayor.

On Thursday, the BNP held a news conference demanding an election by the end of the year, as well as the resignation of two student advisers and the national security adviser. The party warned that without these steps, continued cooperation with the Yunus-led administration would become untenable.

On Saturday, Yunus is expected to meet with both the BNP and Bangladesh Jamaat-e-Islami (BJI), the largest Islamic political party in Bangladesh.

Is Yunus preparing to resign?

Amid this growing turbulence, speculation has intensified that Yunus may be preparing to resign. Local media began reporting that he had indicated that he intended to step down and address the nation in a televised statement, during a cabinet meeting on Thursday afternoon, following widespread social media chatter.

That evening, Nahid Islam – a student leader from the July uprising against the previous government and now head of the newly formed National Citizen Party (NCP) – met Yunus along with two student advisers to make an appeal for him to stay on.

After the meeting, Nahid confirmed to BBC Bangla that Yunus was seriously considering stepping down.

By Friday evening (13:00 GMT), sources within the interim administration told Al Jazeera that Yunus was still weighing his options.

However, two government sources said Yunus is likely to convene an emergency cabinet meeting on Saturday, during which he is expected to discuss the next course of action. One of the sources confirmed that Yunus’s resignation remains a possibility.

Why might Yunus want to resign?

Yunus is contemplating resigning because of intensifying political pressure, according to local media reports.

Two advisers quoted in the Samakal newspaper said Yunus told cabinet members on Thursday that the political parties and other government institutions had failed to deliver on promises to cooperate with the transitional government to implement state reforms and a peaceful democratic transition since the fall of Hasina’s government last year.

It had become impossible to carry out his responsibilities, he was reported as saying. Pressure is also mounting to hold an election. “The prospect of a fair election in the current situation is slim,” he said. He was concerned any election would be interfered with or rigged and he did not want to have to take responsibility for it.

Later on Thursday evening, Yunus met Information Adviser Mahfuj Alam, Local Government Adviser Asif Mahmud Shojib Bhuyain and NCP convenor Nahid Islam at his official residence, the Jamuna State Guest House in Dhaka.

Speaking to BBC Bangla afterwards, Nahid confirmed Yunus was considering resigning and quoted him as saying he felt “held hostage” by protests and political gridlock.

“I cannot work like this if you, all the political parties, cannot reach a common ground,” Nahid quoted Yunus as saying. He urged the interim leader to “remain strong”, stressing the hopes the public had pinned on him after the July uprising that ousted the Awami League government.

Meanwhile, Yunus’s ambitious reform agenda is reportedly faltering, with analysts noting that key arms of the state – including the police and civil bureaucracy – are increasingly slipping beyond the interim government’s control.

One striking example among many, they say, is a proposal to split the National Board of Revenue (NBR), the country’s authority for tax administration, overseeing the collection of income tax, value-added tax (VAT) and customs duties, into two separate entities – a move that the government says is aimed at enhancing efficiency and the integrity of Bangladesh’s tax system. This has been met with strong resistance from senior officials of the NBR over fears that experienced revenue officers will be sidelined.

What does the BNP want?

Speaking to Al Jazeera, BNP leader Amir Khasru Mahmud Chowdhury said his party does not want Yunus to resign. “Nobody asked for his resignation, and we do not want him to do so,” he stated.

“The people are waiting to cast their vote and bring back democracy. They have been deprived of this for nearly two decades,” said Khasru. “We expect him to go for a free and fair election and peacefully hand over power. That’s how he came in.”

He questioned the delay in setting an election timeline. “What is the wait for? This is something [about which] a very strong conversation is going on in the country.”

Khasru said the BNP wants the administration to move into caretaker mode – with a leaner cabinet and the removal of some controversial figures, particularly those with political ambitions or affiliations. “They have already floated a political party,” he said, referring to the student representatives. “Others made partisan statements. These should go if you’re serious about a credible election.”

He dismissed any contradiction between reforms and elections, saying both could move forward simultaneously. “Where there is consensus, reforms can be completed within weeks.”

Khasru also voiced confidence in the Election Commission and the role of the army in ensuring a fair vote. “This is not the era of Sheikh Hasina,” he remarked, suggesting a more conducive political environment for elections.

On the question of trying former Awami League leaders, he said judicial processes could continue in parallel. “The judiciary must do its job – the elected government will continue if more is needed.”

“BNP suffered the most under the previous regime,” he added. “The trials are a national consensus.”

BNP Standing Committee member Salahuddin Ahmed echoed this sentiment in a TV interview on Friday: “If Yunus is personally unable to carry out his duties, the state will find an alternative.” But he added: “As a globally respected figure, we hope he will understand the situation and announce an election roadmap by December.”

What do other political parties want?

NCP’s Senior Joint Convenor Ariful Islam Adeeb rejected the BNP’s narrative, telling Al Jazeera: “All parties were meant to support the interim government after the July uprising, but the BNP stuck to old tactics based on muscle power – that’s the root of the crisis.”

He urged unity, saying: “BNP and all other parties must come together for the national interest.”

Meanwhile, demonstrations and behind-the-scenes meetings continued across Dhaka. On Thursday evening, top leaders of five political parties, including the NCP, attended an emergency meeting at the headquarters of another Islamic political party, Islami Andolan Bangladesh (IAB), called by its chief Mufti Syed Muhammad Rezaul Karim.

They urged all “anti-fascist forces” to unite, defend national sovereignty, and support a credible election under Yunus after key reforms. Several of these parties, including BJI, argue that elections must come after key reforms – such as adopting a proportional voting system and ensuring accountability for past abuses – to prevent any repeat of past authoritarian practices. They believe holding elections without these changes would undermine public trust and risk another crisis.

BJI chief Shafiqur Rahman joined the IAB meeting via phone and endorsed the resolution. On Thursday, he urged Yunus to convene an all-party dialogue to resolve the crisis.

Then, on Friday night, BJI’s Shafiqur Rahman requested a meeting with Yunus, proposing to convene at 12:00 GMT (6pm local time) on Saturday.

Speaking to Al Jazeera on Friday night, NCP Joint Convenor Sarwar Tushar said: “Whatever the rumours, we believe Dr Muhammad Yunus is committed to his historic responsibility.

“There is massive expectation – both from the international community and the people,” he added.

While acknowledging political divisions, Tushar said: “If everyone moves beyond party agendas and focuses on a national agenda, the crisis can be resolved through dialogue.”

What can we expect next?

Political analyst Rezaul Karim Rony told Al Jazeera that talk of Yunus’s resignation may reflect growing frustration over the lack of unity within the transitional setup. “The unity that had formed around the post-uprising interim government appears to be weakening due to vested interests,” he said. “The resignation talk might be a signal underscoring the need to rebuild that unity.”

Rony suggested that certain government appointments may have alienated political parties, raising questions about whether some actors have agendas beyond the official reform mandate. “This could be one reason why the government is struggling to gain broad political cooperation and function effectively,” he noted.

Rony added: “At this point, advocating for elections may [make the administration] appear politically aligned with the BNP. But in the end, it should be up to the people to decide who they want to lead.”

NCP’s Nahid Islam, however, sees otherwise.

He warned in a Facebook post on Friday night: “There’s a conspiracy to sabotage the democratic transition and stage another 1/11-style arrangement.”

The term “1/11” refers to January 11, 2007, when the military-backed caretaker government took control in Bangladesh amid political chaos and ruled for two years, suspending democratic processes.

“Bangladesh has repeatedly been divided, national unity destroyed, to keep the country weak,” Nahid wrote.

Urging Yunus to stay in office and deliver on promises of reform, justice and voting rights, he said, “Dr Yunus must resolve all political crises while in office.”

He also outlined NCP’s demands: a timely July declaration, elections within the announced timeframe (Yunus has repeatedly promised that the election will be held between December 2025 to July 2026), a July Charter with core reforms before polls, visible justice for the July killings, and a roadmap for a new constitution through simultaneous elections to a Constituent Assembly and legislature.

Meanwhile, public anxiety is rising. On Friday, the Bangladesh Army issued a Facebook alert debunking a fake media release circulated a day earlier, which falsely used the military’s logo in what it described as “an apparent attempt to sow confusion and create rifts” between the armed forces and the public. “Do not believe rumours. Do not be misled,” the statement warned.

As the weekend approaches, all eyes are on Muhammad Yunus – and whether he will resign, stand firm, or forge a new consensus to lead the country through its second transition since last year’s dramatic uprising.