Nothing encapsulates the reality in today's Bangladesh better than these two images. The first is of Abu Saeed, a student from Begum Rokeya University in Rangpur. The whole world saw him standing with his arms outstretched, his chest exposed, facing a line of police officers armed with firearms. It was as if he was saying, "Do it, shoot me in the chest. I'm not afraid of death."

The second image is of a young girl. With a school bag on her back, she grips a stick across her chest with both hands. As a police van approaches, she stands firm, seemingly ready to confront it with just that stick. Her face isn't visible, but you can almost hear her saying, "Drive the van, fire the bullets. I'm not backing down from this fight."

These images are reminiscent of the 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre in China. While the details may fade, the image of an unknown young man standing alone in front of a convoy of tanks remains etched in memory, symbolizing defiance with the silent message: "Come, if you can, kill me; I'm not afraid of you."

When a people conquer fear, they become invincible. As Bangabandhu, the founding father of Bangladesh, famously said, once the people of Bangladesh learned to die, no one could suppress them. Are today's young people in Bangladesh sending the same message through these images?

The situation in Bangladesh is dire, with the nation teetering on the brink of political and economic disaster. The once-limited student protest over the quota issue has evolved into a full-blown political crisis. The ruling party's assumption that force and blaming political opponents would quell the unrest has proven ineffective. The images of Abu Saeed with his outstretched arms and the anonymous girl with her school bag demonstrate the failure of this approach. The people are demanding change, and that includes a change of leadership at the highest level.

The most pressing concern, however, is the state of Bangladesh's economy. Signs of a downturn were evident even before the current crisis. The World Bank warned that the government's target of 7.5% growth was unachievable. In April, it highlighted four major challenges: high inflation, a foreign currency deficit, import controls, and risks in the financial sector. The prediction was that national growth would fall to 5.6%. With ongoing political instability, it could tumble even further.

None is more pressing than the issue of foreign exchange reserves. After receiving the third tranche of loans from the IMF, the reserves were reported to be $26.5 billion at the end of June. However, the actual usable reserves might be closer to $13 billion, barely enough to cover two months of import needs. This depletion has led the US-based rating agency S and P to downgrade Bangladesh's credit rating, which could lead to increased borrowing costs, devaluation of the taka, reduced foreign investment, and decreased opportunities in international financial markets.

There are other no less grim facts. The garment sector is facing declining production, remittances are down, and there's a liquidity crisis in the banking sector. The resulting economic vortex could erode foreign investor confidence further. Indeed, signs of this declining confidence are already apparent. Last week, the European Union, one of Bangladesh's major trading partners, declined to conclude the 'Partnership and Cooperation Agreement' due to the ongoing political turmoil. The British Parliament also discussed the political violence in Bangladesh. Rupa Huq, a Bangladeshi-British MP from the Labour Party, harshly criticized the Bangladeshi government's role in suppressing the protests, stating that this government cannot be trusted. Leaders from several other countries, including the United States, have voiced similar concerns and disapproval.

A Bangladeshi-American market expert told me that if the situation continues, Bangladesh could lose its attractiveness as an investment destination. In the face of uncertainty, foreign investors might shy away from Bangladesh and instead opt for countries like Sri Lanka, Vietnam, or Oman, which offer similar or better investment opportunities.

Another major concern is the international pressure on Bangladesh. The United Nations has stated that it does not believe the government's explanation for the use of force and claims to have evidence to the contrary. Amnesty International has expressed even greater distrust in the government's official death toll. The most embarrassing moment came when UN peacekeeping vehicles were used to suppress the protests. The Foreign Ministry's excuse that the UN insignia was not erased due to oversight is laughable. Some speculate that the vehicles were used intentionally to demonstrate international approval. If the military's involvement in suppressing the protests is confirmed, it could jeopardize their participation in UN peacekeeping missions.

Bangladesh, already dependent on the IMF and other foreign donors to manage its economic challenges, cannot afford to ignore this international pressure. Unlike China, which after the Tiananmen Square massacre could withstand foreign criticism and sanctions, Bangladesh lacks the same resilience. Sooner or later, the country will have to turn to these foreign entities for financial aid or other forms of assistance.

Given this situation, an immediate solution to the crisis is essential. There is widespread skepticism among the protesters that the current ruling power can resolve the issue. The protesters are not interested in negotiations with a government that "shoots them like birds." Incremental concessions from the government-such as transferring a rogue police chief, apologies from the minister in charge of internet communications for suspending the internet, or assurances from the ruling party's General Secretary that the police have been advised not to shoot-will not placate those rallying in Dhaka and other major cities. They demand nothing less than the resignation of the current government.

What is the way out of this crisis? The last thing Bangladesh needs is another military takeover, which would only lead to a repeat of the abuses seen during the regimes of Zia and Ershad. An alternative must be found. Based on past experiences, one potential solution could be forming an interim national unity government involving all relevant parties. This body would be tasked with taking immediate steps to address the protesters' demands and hold a credible election.

Such a proposal may seem naïve in a country where political affiliations and ideologies are deeply divisive. The question of who would form such a government is contentious. However, if past is prologue, we can learn from our experiences with previous experiments with unity governments. Questions such as who, what, how, and how many can all be resolved if we reach a consensus on the immediate need for a government of national unity.

The writer is a journalist and author based in New York.