Bangladesh and visit of Manmohan Singh

It has been an unusual few weeks for Bangladesh to have come under international media attention for some right reasons and some, not so. The Economist (30 July, 2011) in a fairly long article titled ' India and Bangladesh: Embraceable you' mainly focused on India's 'growing geopolitical interests' that prompt her 'to seek better relations nearer home'.The analysis could indeed help the policy strategists in Bangladesh to gain a different perspective on India's broad intentions as her Prime Minister is to land in Dhaka in two weeks time bearing some glad tidings in the form and shape of agreements, MOUs, even treaties for the hapless people of Bangladesh. And more intriguingly, till now no one but the close family friends know the nature of these gifts. One could recall faintly the fable of the Greeks bearing gifts for the Trojans and the consequences thereof. The Economist write-up , followed by a Leader (The poisonous politics of Bangladesh: Reversion to type) and a full page banyan column (In the name of the father - an obsession with Bangladesh's past may explain its prime minister's growing intolerance) predictably raised the level of the very 'intolerance' these articles have touched upon, a few notches higher.

Bangladesh response to the first article, curiously sent from the External Publicity wing of the Government's Ministry of Foreign Affairs and not, as is customary, from the Head of the Diplomatic Mission in the concerned capital (as was done by the Saudi Arabian Ambassador in London on some Arab issues, that appeared just before the Bangladesh letter in the Economist ). And the follow-up pieces with provocative titles as above (August 13, 2011 issue), hence, would obviously go without any further rejoinder. The governments do not go sabre-rattling against the international media of long-standing repute alleging 'smear-campaign' and 'acting out other quarter's agenda'. And then somewhat illogically impute a double standard on the same weekly as it had given a certificate of clean elections three years ago. Bangladesh's limp letter, badly drafted and ill-crafted as it indeed was, missed an opportunity to garner the sympathy and understanding of the global readership. Instead, we come out as a pitiable failure to recognise our flaws and hobbling on with a blinkered view of the real world out there.

Interestingly, Dhaka, meanwhile, is lapping up the TIME Specials (August 5, 2011) mention at no. 7 slot the name of our Prime Minister, in their "12 female leaders around the world who have made it to the top". Even a quick look at the short citation there would make one wonder whether the laurel is worth the thorns that came with it. TIME is known to have been passing down the poisoned chalice in their unkindest cut of all. The left-handed compliments landing on slot 7 are that she has "a history of surviving" and that in 2009 as Awami League won the election" and the consummate survivor found herself Prime minister - again."

As the authorities in Dhaka are pouring over the Economist assessments of Indo-Bangladesh relations it is possible that they as well as our leading media representatives would have some additional inputs to bolster Bangladesh's negotiating positions and to field some tough, but reasoned, questions to the visiting Indian Premier and his very capable delegation including, of course, for good measure another family friend the new Chief Minister of West Bengal.

Meanwhile, another highly-regarded journal Washington DC-based Foreign Policy FP has published (in the current July/August, 2011 issue) a three-page Dispatch " Fortress India". FP has a mast slogan ' Global Politics, Economics and Ideas' and is known for its access to rarefied sources and references with hard-hitting policy strategists, cool analysts and dedicated activists. Hence, this Dispatch should catch the attention of our top echelon as its article is boldly headed with a huge Question that apparently we in Bangladesh dare not ask-- "Why is Delhi building a new Berlin Wall to keep out its Bangladeshi neighbours?". This question is solidly pegged on the "Felani killing" episode that possibly is no longer in Dhaka's memory box! Not that we have forgotten, we just do not dare remember and then how many Felanis a nation when fenced in, can remember!

I am sure our man in Washington DC has briefed the Foreign Office and the PMO on the various strands of this Dispatch, starting with the implications of, as FP writes " In India, the 25-year-old border fence - finally expected to be completed next year at a cost of US$ 1.2 billion - is celebrated as a panacea for a whole range of national neuroses.....". FP points out that the Indian Home Minister P. Chidambaram, by 2009, " was declaring that Bangladeshis have ' no business to come to India'."West Bengal BJP head Tathagata Roy ' has called for lining the border with antipersonnel mines. If the predictions come true for immigration from Bangladesh, Roy says, India's population of 900 million Hindus will have no choice but" to convert or jump into the sea". Such a terrifying scenario could quite possibly be a motivated attempt to inflame the uninitiated millions and allow India's Indo-centric policies of mass atrocities on her poor neighbours an acceptable form of real-politic and patriotic statecraft.

FP dispatch makes a chilling reading as it states ' The border itself has hardened into a grim killing field.' India's own Masum and the Human Rights Watch released a bleak report in December on the border situation with detailed observations, including, as Foreign Policy quotes ' it accused the Indian Border Security Force of " indiscriminate killing and torture." FP's report concludes that 'the tensions that make it into a killing zone are remarkably durable.'

Bangladesh does not appear to have received any dependable assurance from the Indian Home Minister Chidambaram during his very recent visit that Indian trigger-happy stance would be curbed and apparently we did not raise both the substantive and symbolic implications of their barbed-wire fencing of a small, friendly neighbour. And one would be forgiven to assume that such a fence all around is meant to make us cooperate in allowing unfettered transit facilities to India apart from letting them have the pounds of flesh torn from other parts of Sonar Bangla.

I am compelled to refer to the most unusual and perhaps a highly suspect practice of using non-elected, non-professional advisers to represent the Government when full-fledged Ministers of Foreign Affairs, Home, Finance, Commerce and Water Resources and their constitutionally empowered Ministries are supposed to deal with the range of sensitive, national issues when the Indian Prime Minister with a powerful Ministerial delegation come visiting Dhaka. In one of my earlier write-ups, I had referred to the uncanny ability of the Indians to do political rope trick with masterly art of misdirection. They are this time using the two advisers to talk on India's keen interest to seek to resolve land boundary problems, Tipaimukh question and may be, Teesta and other rivers issue.

We have just seen pictures of signing of Bangladesh maps, etc and we are told so very casually that our maps were being 'slightly adjusted' to finally resolve the land-boundary disputes that even Bangabandhu had not been able to agree to. We are all puzzled and our sacred Constitution, if I am not wrong, does not permit any change whatsoever in Bangladesh's territorial boundaries, frontiers and dimensions, unless two-thirds of the total Parliament members vote for such a motion clearly defined.

These are the 'misdirection'; I was referring to along with the emotive issue of Tipaimukh. One of the advisers (no one seems to know what he is the adviser for excepting from time to time he holds some unashamed briefs for our good neighbour) who on return from Delhi, stated that Manmohan Singh 'may announce' during his Dhaka visit that " New Delhi for the first time has agreed to consult Dhaka before (mark the words now) implementing the controversial Tipaimukh Dam project." There is no mention about any change that Dhaka's views on the Dam might appear reasonable and hence, acceptable. And this is one issue for which our big Parliamentary Delegation went to Delhi, had learnt about India's intentions, had a plane ride , but did not have an on-site view of things and came back in July,2009 and then during our Prime Minister's January, 2010 visit to Delhi no further attention to our deep concerns was forthcoming. And we have not had any urges to enquire as to what was going on in Tipaimukh, over these two long years, though we have a huge Mission in Delhi and also in Kolkata (and I believe in Agartala).

As may be recalled, our experts have given their well-reasoned opinions about the broad range of adverse impact of Tipaimukh Dam both on Bangladesh and on India's own north-eastern states, where there are already serious political unrest and economic deprivation and neglect. And that being one of the main reasons for India's all-out bid to get the transit issue sorted out with Bangladesh. Tipaimukh is a political time bomb that India can use when required if situation in the seven sisters go out of hand, with Bangladesh obviously taking the blast being positioned as the front-line state for India's eastern flank. Any harm now or later to us in this region is certainly not going to be a factor of any importance in India's larger geo-political strategies in the China-dominated scenario, as mentioned in the Economist article.

The other serious issue from our point of view, the huge trade deficits, displays another 'misdirection' in the form of Maitree train link and of all things ' border haats' and that too when our authorities just could not see the barbed-wire fences coming up all around! And we have taken much pain in bending over backwards to cultivate Dadas like Jyoti Basu , Pranab Mukherjee in vain The latter had visited Dhaka several times (and once also during the last caretaker government) and also brought Indian Premier's message of felicitations to our Prime Minister on her election and assured all aspects of our relations would be looked at most urgently. That trade deficit requires India's agreement to expand our export lists and reduce the tariff and non-tariff barriers, not border haats. Now Mr Mukherjee has the powers as the Union Finance Minister to do what he had promised to do in a more effective manner, but would he, in fact, would India, ever do the right thing? We are now trying to cultivate some Didis like Mamata Banerjee, Sonia Gandhi and so on.

And we all know our bargaining chips are few and more regrettably, our bargaining capability and integrity are in short supply. Our concerned authorities are well aware as to the contents and thrusts of our legitimate claims, as these cover our national security, socio-economic-environmental paradigms and adequate compense for India's exploitation of our resources and facilities including the hugely sensitive transit regime, placing yet-to-visualise burden on our infra-structure, security exposure and risks, seemingly on a permanent basis.

One-sided family (?) familiarity apart, the nation's sovereignty, freedom of external actions and the people's security and welfare require our utmost attention to all relevant inputs from all sources, even the friendly fires, so that our guardians and expert policy makers remain sharp with their senses, keen on their skills and act with wisdom before, rather than after the events. One Farakka should be enough.

Following a pithe comment by an Irish parliamentarian on a distressing prospect of a disaster, let me say "Bangladesh's cup of misery runneth over - and it is not yet full!" The question is will the forthcoming visit of the Prime Minister of India make it full?

Jamal Syed is an analyst and free-lance contributor.

Related Topics: Op-Ed and Editorial receive the latest by email: subscribe to weekly blitz's free mailing list

Bangladesh and visit of Manmohan Singh

Comment on this item