The word from Bangladesh after Sheikh Hasina’s departure is about rabid anti-India voices emerging from the woodwork, taking form and shape in the streets. The word is about the imminent arrival of Tarique Rahman, son of BNP leader Khaleda Zia, from exile in London.
More can be expected given that Sheikh Hasina had cracked down hard on anti-India groups, whether the Jamaat-i-Islami, BNP or others such as Northeast insurgent leaders, some of whom were handed over to Delhi. There could be demands for retribution.
In that sense, India’s decision to send home all non-essential staff from the High Commission in Dhaka and from the consulates in Chittagong, Khulna, Rajshahi and Sylhet, was prudent. Otherwise, these remain open and functioning albeit with small staff.
The silver lining is student leaders, political parties and the army moving quickly to stabilise the situation with the announcement of an interim government headed by Nobel Laureate Mohammad Yunus. He’s been critical of India’s support for Sheikh Hasina, sample some of these remarks made in an interview to the Indian Express.
“When India says it’s an internal affair it hurts me. If there is a fire in the brother’s house how can I say it’s an internal affair.”
“If something is happening in Bangladesh … youth are being killed by government bullets, law and order is disappearing … it won’t be contained within the borders of Bangladesh, it will spill over to neighbours.”
None of this can be deemed anti-Indian, Yunus is voicing a fact. He has called for cooperation with India although whether his voice will matter in the coming days or with whichever government comes to power in Dhaka in the months ahead, is another issue.
But Yunus is well regarded in Washington and has a wide circle among India’s economist community. It may be hard for any new dispensation in Dhaka to ignore him.
What’s clear is that after 15 years of a pro-India government, the tide had to turn. Did India ever advise Sheikh Hasina to be less authoritarian, not to rig elections. That is not clear although common sense suggests this may have been the case.
But as a source told StratNews Global, she was adamant and beyond a point, no outside government can tell the prime minister of another how to handle her internal issues. So it would seem, India made the best of the situation even if it didn’t like her flirting with the Chinese or looking the other way as Muslim fundamentalists vandalised Hindu temples and attacked minority communities.
In return, relative peace prevailed in India’s northeast, infrastructure and connectivity projects went ahead as did people to people ties.
Did India advise Hasina to leave when the streets erupted? Sources say yes and this advice may have been repeated several times. She moved only when her son told her to do so. Her departure was based on protocols India had devised many years ago, the sources said.
India has lost a key ally in Dhaka but the story doesn’t end here. No matter what political form takes shape there, India is right next door and cannot be ignored. Hopefully, India will be able to revive old channels of communication with the BNP.
Pakistan can be expected to tap into its network in Bangladesh and also help the Chinese stoke the fires against Delhi, but they are doing that in Nepal and the Maldives and we seem to be keeping our end up.
Could Hasina’s departure be part of some diabolical American conspiracy? The US, from what one hears, didn’t like her more so when she played footsie with China. But would they connive in her overthrow? It’s hard to say but there’s no doubt the street protests had a context of their own which Hasina misread and mishandled.
Those who suspect a US role in Hasina’s departure, point to Afghanistan which ended in a similar denouement. But India seems to be working well with the Taliban despite recent history. Or even Maldives where President Muizzu, after breathing fire for some months, is reaching out to Delhi.
