It is but natural that Bangladesh should in the current situation blame India for all its ills, but to claim that Indians look down upon Bangladesh is to say the least preposterous. The rightward shift in Indian politics has not changed the fundamental character of India’s foreign policy and to believe that stary remarks made by one Minister represents the generic attitude of India is a bit off the mark … writes Dr Fazal Rahman
Zafar Sobhan, Editor of Dhaka Tribune has written an editorial (24 August 2024) in the newspaper regarding 10 things that India needs to know about Bangladesh. Given the current wave of the anti-India feeling within Bangladesh, it could be argued that this piece is no different from others. But a hard look at the article indicates that the author is sending a signal that India needs to revisit its policies. It is therefore worth taking on each of the points that Sobhan makes to understand the real state of relations between India and Bangladesh. Lest we forget, it is India which helped in the creation of Bangladesh. The ties that India forged with the people of Bangladesh have sustained through the decades and today stand stronger.
The first point made is that the students who overthrew Sheikh Hasina are not Islamists and nor is it an Islamist Revolution. On the surface, this assertion combined with the claim that Bangladesh is a Muslim majority country is a symbol of the past as most governments have ensured that Bangladesh does not become an “Islamist country” or a “hotbed of militancy.” The very nature of society in Bangladesh, influenced by Bengali culture and other influences has been re-enforced by the State by ensuring that the nation remains secular. However, in the past decade jihadi and radical elements utilized the presence of the Jamaat-e-Islami to gain a foothold in Bangladesh.
Far more important is the nature of the student protests. The picture used to illustrate Sobhan’s opinion is that of a revolution. Reminds one of the slogan ‘inqulab zindabad’. However, are the student protests just ‘democrats’? Only revolutionaries demand the removal of the incumbent Prime Minister with the threat of street power. This is exactly what happened. All Bangladeshis would be happy to see the restoration of democracy in their country. True democracy in Bangladesh will come eventually, when it moves to multi-party elections, instead of the current two-party system.
Pertinently, the current civil unrest demonstrates the dangers to the minority in Bangladesh and while Sobha reassures that the Hindus living in that country are not in danger, reports continue to pour in of temples being vandalized, Hindu teachers and professors being forcibly asked to resign and an overall reassertion of Islamic identity becoming evident. This appears to take away from the earlier assertion of Bangladeshi society as a whole not being in favour of a secular approach to life and in relations with its neighbours.
The choice of the word ‘anarchy’ and the claim that the current situation does not reflect this political condition reflects a mindset of cleansing. That battle on the streets between the students and the police led to a state of anarchy in which an elected Prime Minister was forced to flee the country. Note that it is the people of Bangladesh who voted for Sheikh Hasina, then why blame India? Also, the anarchy factor is being underplayed to make it look as though the transfer of power to the interim government under Mohammad Yunus was a peaceful one, far from it. Let us recognize this. His appointment was the demand of the student leaders and therefore, it is a doubtful claim that there is popular support for Yuns. That having been said, let us hope that Yunus is able to lead Bangladesh out of the current state of anarchy!
It is notable that “everything is relative” in relation to the manner in which policemen were hung upside down under bridges and others killed openly. The hard-handed approach of Sheikh Hasina to any political dissent over the last 15 years is probably what led to her downfall. Thus, the next point about the Awami League having lost the support of the people and emphasis on the unlikelihood of their coming to power in a decade or so, is well taken. However, again the roots of this crisis lie within Bangladesh, which created a political eco-system of just two main parties and each election became a contest of wills. For Bangladesh to ‘hate’ her for what she has done is to forget her contribution to the nation, but that is for Bangladeshis to decide.
It is but natural that Bangladesh should in the current situation blame India for all its ills, but to claim that Indians look down upon Bangladesh is to say the least preposterous. The rightward shift in Indian politics has not changed the fundamental character of India’s foreign policy and to believe that stary remarks made by one Minister represents the generic attitude of India is a bit off the mark. If Bangladesh wants to forget India’s contribution to their creation in 1971, so be it. India does not go around telling nations that it helped when it was needed. By the way 1971, was a war between India and Pakistan and the creation of Bangladesh was the end result. Remember though that the facts of history cannot be changed!
At the end of the day, we all agree that it is time to move on but remain engaged as friends. Everything that Sobhan highlights in respect of India’s concerns are aptly summarized, but one must keep in mind that being friends requires reciprocity. India has always held that principle in dealing with its neighbours.
Complex issues such as sharing of river waters are often prone to prolonged and difficult negotiations. These should not be seen as the benchmark of India’s attitude. In the long run, Bangladesh would benefit from staying the course on its relationship with India. The parameters of this relationship will be based on the past as we head into the future. Zafar Sobhan has done well to articulate a viewpoint. As Editor of Dhaka Tribune, he is responsible for being objective in his analysis of the current situation and its perceived outcomes in terms of relations with India. The balance in the current mood of things shows that the interim government is more pre-occupied with domestic challenges than foreign policy. Given time, the narrative on foreign policy will become clearer. At that stage, one can look back and ask, whither India-Bangladesh relations?