Instability and uncertainty stalk Bangladesh

It is often mentioned that the fate of individuals and nations hang by a slender thread. On August 5 this year, even as Muhammad Yunus (the current head/chief adviser of the interim government in Bangladesh) was to be arraigned before a court of law for certain alleged actions against the state, the then Prime Minister, Sheikh Hasina, was compelled to resign and flee the country to neighbouring India. This was a sequel to several weeks of protests over a ‘quota system’, reserving a percentage of all government jobs to descendants of ‘freedom’ fighters involved in Bangladesh’s ‘war of independence’. The government’s heavy-handed measures to suppress the student demonstrations had led to a groundswell of protest against the government, and Sheikh Hasina herself. Even after the proposal for the ‘quota system’ was withdrawn, massive protests continued, signalling the depth of anger against the government, and Sheikh Hasina personally, compelling her to flee.

Bangladesh currently has an interim government headed by Mr. Yunus, an economist, which has the backing of the Army, and with students functioning as the ‘storm-troopers’. In quick succession, the Chief Justice, the central bank governor, a host of university vice-chancellors and other key personnel were compelled to step down. The main charge levelled against Sheikh Hasina is that she had become a virtual dictator, trampling on the civil liberties of citizens and embarking on high handed actions against her political opponents.

Still early days but much can happen

It would be invidious to characterise Sheikh Hasina’s ouster as a victory for ‘democratic forces’. No doubt, it has some of the characteristics of the ‘Prague Spring’ that rocked Czechoslovakia in the mid-20th century, but the world does not have to be reminded of how the revolt was snuffed out within a short time frame. There may be no equivalent of the ‘Warsaw Pact Powers’ (which ended the Prague students’ revolt) on the horizon in Bangladesh as of now. Today’s major powers, essentially the United States and China, however, have a huge stake in how matters turn out and are not averse to meddling in Bangladesh.

What happened in Bangladesh does not conform to a classical ‘colour’ revolution instigated by the U.S. or the West, but it has provided scope for the ‘Big Powers’ to meddle in the affairs of Bangladesh, anxious to secure a base for themselves in South Asia, as part of their larger designs.

Much will depend on the turn of events. In the first flush of exuberance and anger against Sheikh Hasina, vandalism seemed to reach its apogee, with images of Sheikh Hasina and even the statue of the nation’s founding father, Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, becoming targets of riotous mobs. The position of Mr. Yunus itself appears tenuous at this stage, and it is uncertain how long the Army would support the present arrangement. Pressure from political parties to hold early elections is already evident, and if and when elections are announced, it could shatter the surface calm.

Areas of danger

The real concern is whether the ‘democracy deficit’, which Sheikh Hasina helped perpetuate to overcome political obstacles, can be offset democratically, or whether it would lead to another round of violent events. A worrying aspect is the increasing role of Islamist parties in Bangladesh which, in recent years, has become a potent force. An India intent on maintaining a balance between religion and politics would find the growing presence of radical Islamist entities a potent danger.

What India can at present possibly hope for is that the people of Bangladesh would continue to remember India’s role in the early 1970s, which led to the creation of an independent state of Bangladesh. Also that any and future governments would display the same degree of warmth as the outgoing Sheikh Hasina regime. While many in India have not forgotten the ‘dark days’ of the early 1970s — when India had to fight a war with Pakistan on the one hand and cope with a hostile U.S. at another level, intent on detaching India from Russia — so as to bring about the independence of East Pakistan (later to become Bangladesh), India can only hope that similar sentiments still prevail in Bangladesh, notwithstanding the degree of hostility towards Sheikh Hasina and the Awami League.

For its part, India must acknowledge, and be grateful for, the support extended by Bangladesh over the years in dealing with militant groups belonging to India’s northeast, that had sought sanctuary there and become a scourge for India’s security establishment. Under Sheikh Hasina these militants could no longer find sanctuary in Bangladesh. A prolonged period of uncertainty in Bangladesh following recent developments could well result in the regrouping of, and revival of militant activities in India by groups such as the United Liberation Front of Asom, the Mizo National Front and the NSCN.

Meanwhile, the West, which generally views events across the globe through the prism of geo-politics, is already putting out the idea that Bangladesh might well become the crucible for the next phase of conflict between India and China. Undoubtedly, both India and China have important stakes in Bangladesh. More recently, Bangladesh has begun to make certain overtures to China to accommodate its economic and defence needs. It is quite possible that with the eclipse of Sheikh Hasina, the successor regime in Bangladesh might well seek to strengthen its China connection, even as Sheikh Hasina was seen to be manifestly pro-India. All this is, however, in the realm of conjecture, and it may be too early to view Bangladesh through the prism of geo-politics — China, India, the U.S. et al.

Compounding problems for India

For an India, wrestling with the problem of having to deal with difficult and uncertain situations along much of its periphery, specially to the west and the northwest, the Bangladesh developments could not have come at a worse time. In the east, it now confronts a Bangladesh that appears set to shift from being a friendly neighbour to a problem state. The vexed issue of the Rohingya Muslims, which needed an early solution, will, in all likelihood, be put on the back burner for now.

Myanmar is currently controlled by a clutch of generals (who are not above being enticed by western military advisers), and while the generals may not be overtly hostile to India at present, they do not see themselves as being in step with it. Lurking in the background are again certain external forces — not only China and Pakistan — who are likely to fish in these troubled waters. This could exert a pincer-type stranglehold on India’s ambition to achieve a peaceful and prosperous South Asia.

India may, hence, need to devise a new set of strategies to deal with the emerging situation. One myth that has already been exploded is that India had little to fear from developments to its east and south. Both regions have today become highly problematic, to say the least. The threat from China also looms larger than ever before if, as is being anticipated, it could secure a beachhead in a post-Sheikh Hasina Bangladesh. A simultaneous strengthening of the China-Pakistan axis would thereafter pose a threat of a kind that had not existed for several years. More than anything else, it is the spectre of Islamist radicalism that could well haunt the entire region — more so in Bangladesh at this time alongside the threat of a possible link up between radical Islamist elements in Bangladesh, Myanmar, Thailand and Southeast Asia.

The troubles in Bangladesh are by no means over. Violent street protests are usually a precursor for events that seldom have a good ending. The experience of other countries is that students seldom achieve through protests what they seek. This has been the recent experience in Europe and elsewhere. Movements of this kind tend to be usually taken over by forces inimical to democracy. Consequently, India faces a moral and security dilemma in the wake of recent events in Bangladesh.

M.K. Narayanan is a former Director, Intelligence Bureau, a former National Security Adviser, and a former Governor of West Bengal