Bangladesh appears at the cusp of far-reaching irreversible changes that may negatively impact not only its people but the entire region. Democracy, peace, security, rule of law and accelerated economic progress, that it had experienced in the recent years, appear increasingly improbable in the foreseeable future. Current turmoil and uncertainty have had a spill over impact even on India.
INDIAN FOREIGN MINISTER AT FUENRAL OF KHALEDA ZIA
Amidst sustained killings of Hindus and vandalization of their homes, temples and businesses, alongside provocative statements by the Caretaker regime of Bangladesh, India displayed a calm, warm and friendly gesture by sending the External Affairs Minister to attend the funeral of former Prime Minister Khaleda Zia. The Media also showed the EAM handing over a letter of condolence from Prime Minister Modi to Tarique Rahman, the son of deceased BNP leader. Rahman has recently returned to the country, following 17 years of self-imposed exile to evade a volley of legal cases initiated under caretaker regime during 2007-08 and Sheikh Hasina Govt subsequently.
Some critics of the Indian government have mis-interpreted the India's gesture as driven by over-pragmatism, showing India's willingness to deal with whosoever grabs power in Bangladesh through whatsoever means. Some point to partisan interests like 25-year Power Purchase Agreement between an Indian corporate entity and Bangladesh Power Development Corporation among multiple issues that are at stake.
But in death of any statesperson, including opponents, generosity and graciousness are hallmarks of the highest level of maturity in statecraft.
CONSISTENT ANTI-INDIA POSITION OF KHALEDA ZIA
Khaleda
Zia was known for her consistently strident anti-India position. She had
opposed almost everything that could have fostered better India-Bangladesh
ties. This included renewal of 1972 India-Bangladesh friendship Treaty, India's
1975 Farakka barrage project or India-Bangladesh land connectivity or Indian concerns on illegal immigration as well as sanctuary for North-East Indian insurgents in Bangladesh, amongst
several issues. Yet she received warm attention of successive Indian
Governments and many of her party associates enjoyed good ties in India.
During
her rule, Bangladesh had become a hotbed of terrorism and a major
launchpad for anti-India organised crime besides a safe sanctuary for secessionists and criminals from North-East India pursued by police and enforcement agencies in India. Presence of pro-India forces of Bengali cultural-linguistic nationalism in its security forces acted as a degree of limited antidote though. But an intense anti-India approach, though significantly subterranean, always remained at the core of BNP's outlook towards geopolitics and security in the region.
GENSIS OF ANTI-INDIA POSITION OF BNP AND KHALEDA
ZIA
One
cannot fault Khaleda Zia or BNP for anti-India outlook, policies and actions.
Khaleda had inherited the political legacy and support base of Islamic
nationalists that her slain husband Zia ur Rahman, a former Martial
Administrator turned President of Bangladesh, had re-created and nurtured.
Rahman is considered a key architect of Aug 15, 1975, coup in which the
founder of Bangladesh, Sheikh Miujib, was assassinated and his elected
government was overthrown.
Many
knowledgeable experts believe that without the backing of Pakistani
deep state, and it’s the then patron, who was angered by the liberation of
Bangladesh and military victory of a Soviet leaning India, the 1975 coup in
Bangladesh was impossible. Within weeks of the coup, Zia ur Rahman had taken
over as Deputy Chief Martial Law Administrator. He rose to the rank of Chief
Martial Law Administrator within a year to eventually take over as unelected
President of the country by April 1977.
The
entire dynamics of these developments, involving lot of palace conspiracies,
deceit and double dealing, remain shrouded in mystery. But Zia ur Rahman's
Presidency was terminated again by one such conspiracy when he was
assassinated in 1981 in what appeared an internal feud within the Bangladesh
Army.
Once Bangladesh had been liberated, a re-unification with Pakistan was neither possible nor desirable for either Bengali Islamists or Pakistanis. Crushing defeat in 1971 had destroyed the very will and capacity of Pakistan to even imagine something like this. The strong antipathy against Pakistan was widely prevalent among Bengali masses where memories of horror perpetrated by Pakistani Army were still fresh. But smarting under that defeat, Pakistan was unwilling to reconcile with the reality. And hence, as it is well known, Pakistani deep state built an elaborate infrastructure and regional network for irregular diffused covert war through subversion, radicalism, organised crime and terrorism, under the suspected patronage of its the then patron, to protect its military controlled dispensation in Pakistan. Dhaka was one of the earliest grounds where these capacities were tested.
On
the other hand, Bengali Islamists also knew that as independent state they had
far more acceptability at home and huge leverage abroad. Hence surrender of the
newly gained freedom and sovereignty was never on their agenda. But an attempt
to redefine the national identity of Bangladesh and re-shape its relations with the Western world and Pakistan
clearly appeared indispensable for sheer survival.
Geopolitical assessments are neither driven by legal-
clerical rigour nor even flights of fantasy. These need to factor in both the
visible and the invisible ingredients to accurately anticipate at least a clear range of
possibilities. This is why it is a complex science where no AI can replace the strengths of a human mind. However, a mere anticipation of emerging challenges/threats are insufficient to deal with the same in absence of effective and sustainable capacities to prevent, preempt and deter these challenges/threats. Failure, negligence and even miscalculations fritter away precious energies, making a disaster
inevitable.
The 1975 coup in Bangladesh was a big failure for all those who had envisioned a composite humanism for whole of South Asia. Where people of all faiths could thrive despite the pain and trauma of partition. And Islamic identity could not be manipulated by extra regional powers as part of their zero-sum geopolitical strategy to bleed the entire region through radicalism, organised crime and terrorism.
The agenda
of the dispensation that grabbed power in Bangladesh in 1975 was crystal
clear. Zia ur Rahman and his associates used their grip over state power
to amalgamate and coalesce together the so-called “Islamist nationalists”
from Army as well as educated and rich urban Bengali Muslims, alongside radical lumpen forces like Jamaat e Islami, to create a political and ideological
support base for "Bengali Islamic nationalism". This was the only way the new
dispensation, lacking any electoral legitimacy and mass base, could appear credible. The
new political edifice, relying on emotive appeal of both "Islamic" and "Bengali" identity countered the secular Bengali cultural nationalism that Awami
League and Sheikh Mujib had been espousing.
DEEP ROOTS OF ISLAMIC RADICALISM IN EAST BENGAL
East
Bengal or East Pakistan, or the current areas under Bangladesh, were not alien
to Islamic radicalism. Some of the worst pre-partition
riots on the subcontinent had taken place in Bengal. In 1941, Hindu population
in the current Bangladesh was around 28% which had come down to 22% in 1951 from where
it has dwindled to less than 8% by 2022. In the 1911 census, Hindu population in the current
territory of Bangladesh was around 40%. Hence, Hindus have been fleeing Muslim
majority areas of Bangladesh or pre-partitioned Bengal for a long time.
Awami League led cultural
nationalism that eventually succeeded in liberating Bangladesh, attempted to reverse this
trend. It sought to project the humanist, inclusive and indigenously
South Asian or Indian face of Islam where Muslims, despite being in majority
could live in harmony with Hindus within Bangladesh and a Hindu majority India. This was
a huge development in the larger context of civilizational war that had
been imposed on this subcontinent in the name of Islam by receding colonial
powers through their proxies in West Pakistan.
SUPPORT OF EXTRA REGIONAL POWERS TO ISLAMIC RADICALISM ON INDIAN SUBCONTINENT
It is a well-known that throughout the last century, the most powerful super-power kept supporting Islamic radicals and even Pakistani terrorist until United States itself faced 9/11 terror attacks. Their reference to Pakistani terrorists in Kashmir as freedom fighters is well documented and so is their design to cover up Pakistani role in 1993 terrorist attacks in Mumbai. In retrospect it appears too naive in 1970s to assume that either a vanquished Pakistan or its patrons would have accepted the rise of secular cultural nationalism in Muslim majority Bangladesh instead of Islamic radicalism, something that offered raison d'ĂȘtre for existence of Pakistan even if it had be ruled by the military.
Secular
intellectuals of Bangladesh maintain that this is what explains favourable
press to BNP in the West even in recent years. This is despite exposure of its
open collusion with radical and terrorist elements in the region. Many experts,
including ousted Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina herself, have accused the opaque
and unidentified elements from the Western world of toppling her Govt in 2024.
As
President of Bangladesh during 1977-81, Zia ur Rahman had granted amnesty to
almost all the accused of 1975 coup, including the assassins of Banga Bandhu and his
family members. He had gone on to rehabilitate and accommodate the so-called
collaborators and proxies of Pakistan Army in Bangladesh who had killed freedom fighters of the country. These included incumbents of Jamaat e
Islami and its offshoots like Al Badr and Al Shams, who were collectively called Razakaars.
These forces had specifically targeted Bengali Hindus to fan Islamic sentiments
and marginalize the Bengali cultural nationalism. With the
backing of occupying Pak Army, they had killed a very large number of patriotic
Muslim Bengali fighters. Impartial sources place this figure at 300,000 to
500,000 but Awami League and its associate maintain that 3 million civilians
were killed by Pak Army and "Razakaars" in run up to the freedom of the country.
Pakistan, despite the backing of the most powerful super-power in the last century, had been comprehensively vanquished in the regular conventional war at the hands of India in 1971. But since then it had been building capacities in the realm of covert warfare with renewed energy by coopting clandestine organised crime group and targeting civilians. It exploited the emotive appeal of Islamic identity as well as its previous linkages with a section of Bangladesh Army officers. Through this strategy, it was possible to recapture state power in Bangladesh, at least to a substantial extent. It did not need majority in Bangladesh to be on its side for this purpose.
When Pakistani military establishment has never pursued any developmental goal or agenda for the people of Pakistan, it would be naive to expect any such objective from them for people of Bangladesh or Afghanistan or anywhere it has accessed territory and authority. Hate for Hindus and glory of Islam offered justification for indulgence in all shades of highly lucrative organised crime at one level and rampant corruption in developing world, including India, created willing partners almost everywhere from politics to criminal justice system to media and civil society activism among others. Consistent preaching of hate towards Hindus on the other hand raised an army Muslim youth to run this machinery of organised crime. The entire dynamics in this direction is difficult to gauge but many Indian securocrats, especially a couple of senior Muslim Police officers, have carried out extensive credible researches to establish the linkage between terrorism and organised crime. They conclude that without patronage of the most powerful opaque global entities, such infrastructure of Pak deep state is unsustainable.
Hence, when a popularly elected government in Dhaka was overthrown in 1975 by a numerically smaller number of well-placed men in uniform, role of both Pakistani deep state and its patron was suspected. The emergent regime in Dhaka, lacking mass support and legitimacy, coopted violent radical
Islamist groups with strong street presence to demonstrate mass support for itself. Commitment to Islam absolved it from any sense of accountability to anyone. But unlike Pakistani Punjabis, Bengalis are thinking people. They have tendency to question. Hence, much more elaborate planning and execution was required. But the nascent nation of Bangladesh was
robbed of a legitimate and popularly elected government. Normal evolutionary
course of it nascent democracy in a culturally more advanced Muslim majority part of the subcontinent was destroyed. This subcontinent's march towards composite humanism was reversed.
ROLE OF ZIA UR RAHMAN IN LIBERATION OF BANGLADESH
BNP Supporters claim that it was Zia ur Rahman's announcement of liberation of Bangladesh on March 27, 1971 from a radio station that had inspired the Bengalis to fight Pakistan Army. This group has perennially tried to underplay the role of Mukti Bahini and even Indian Army and often credited Bangladesh Army led by officers like Zia ur Rahman. But many Awami League leaders point out that Zia was only a major rank officer serving in the undivided Pakistan Army. He had merely announced the message of Banga Bandhu Mujib Rahman expressing loyalty to the latter despite being in the Pakistan Army. The same message had been announced on the preceding day by Mujib’s political associate M A Hannan.
There are credible inputs that Zia had, as a disciplined soldier, had been initially loyal to Pakistan. He was offloading weapons on behalf of Pakistan Army that had been dispatched to kill Bengali civilians. But it were Bengali troops under him who had revolted pushing a hesitant and reluctant Zia to break ranks with Pakistan Army or face lynching by troops that he was leading. Hence, there was sudden change of heart on Match 25, 1971 whereas he was fighting for Pakistan Army until then. Many secular intellectuals it were rank and file within the Army or popular sentiment within Bangladesh that forced Zia ur Rahman to switch sides. It was not a conscious and well thought out decision. Further, being located in Chittagong, he faced much lesser threat from Pakistan Army who were too thin in the area and lacked familiarity with local terrain.
However, role of Zia ur Rahman in liberation of Bangladesh cannot be discarded. Yet it would be grossly wrong to put him at the same pedestal as Sheikh Mujib. Something definitely must have transpired in between.
SHEIKH MUJIB
Sheikh Mujib was the unquestionable icon and architect of Bangladesh with unmatched charisma. He was leader of Awami League Party that had won 167 out of 313 seats of National Assembly of undivided Pakistan in 1970. Yet Yahya Khan had refused to administer oath of office to him, rejecting the poll verdict. Likes of Bhutto and other Western Pakistani cast racial slurs on him. One Col Maqsood of Pak Army was quoted as stating "fish eating stinking Bengalis" were unfit to sit in National Assembly of Pakistan. This was the general mood where Bengalis were derided over their language, food, music and identity. There is huge literature about internal colonisation of Eastern Pakistan where its revenues earned from Jute exports funded the lavish style of West Pakistani elite and military officers. Pak Army officers willfully killed, oppressed and assaulted Bengalis without provocations. Mujib was initially demanding autonomy for East Pakistan, including linguistic and cultural freedom with his 6-point charter. But approach of Yahya Khan and West Pakistani politicians who mocked Bengalis and threatened flow a river of Bengali blood on streets East Pakistan, amidst persistent humiliation of Bengali identity, compelled Mujib to call for freedom of his people through peaceful civil disobedience. He was promptly placed in prison and charged with treason. It was his charisma and popular support that brought people on streets braving genocide and mass rapes.
The details of atrocities by Pakistan Army and its proxies shall outrage human sensibilities beyond all words. Millions of Bengalis were massacred and hundreds of thousands of women were raped and maimed by Pakistani troops and Razakaars. Hindus were specifically targeted because they were most helpless. But patriotic Bengali Muslims and Awami League members were also not spared. Later they were targeted as real threat to Pakistan. That provided the foundation for unprecedented solidarity between Bengali Muslims and Hindus.
Awami League supporters specifically asserted many of the local Hindu like practices, customs and traditions to demonstrate their defiance to West Pakistan's military establishment. These included Alpanas, Bengali sarees and bindis to Bengali music and food among others. Major Zia ur Rahman was a non-entity and completely irrelevant when the resistance movement began with Sheikh Mujib as rallying force. It is ridiculous to compare him with Bangal Bandhu in terms of mass appeal, persona, outlook, courage, vision and commitment or contribution to the cause of independence of Bangladesh.
Once Bangladesh earned freedom with the help of Indian military intervention, and Pakistani Commander in Chief Niazi with his 93,000 troops surrendered, Sheikh Mujib focused on building his nation. He was so outraged by Punjabi racialism of West Pakistani military establishment that he wanted carry together his people with a secular identity and agenda of governance. He was confident of his ability and popularity in this direction. He had laid special emphasis on upliftment of the poor, especially farmers and industrial workers. But sadly, he was proven wrong and paid with his life.
Pro-BNP intellectuals describe Sheikh Mujib's action of formation BAKSAL (Bangladesh Krishak Shramik Awami League) by amalgamating left leaning parties and forces and outlawing all other parties, as attempt to monopolise control over state power. This was particularly viewed with suspicion by affluent Muslim elite in Dhaka as well as sections of Bangladesh Army officers who had been a privileged lot. Even the protestors who burned his museum early this year derided both him and Sheikh Hasina as fascists. There is an alternative point of view that both Mujib and Hasina, with the backing of their friends and well-wishers, should have destroying the support of Islamists opposed to secular nationalism of Bangladesh, but they should have allowed a safety valve to exist. This is debatable and probably far too complex an issue.
BENGALI ISLAMIC NATIONALISM
Simultaneously, credible inputs suggest that Sheikh Mujib's pro poor and somewhat communism like authoritarian approach invited disapproval of the capitalist West. Islamism was a good excuse to snuff out the voice of people. This later became the justification for both violent regime change as well as perpetuation of an unpopular and unelected dispensation. Sophisticated urban Bengali elite, many among whom had shared good rapport with Pakistani military establishments in both Dhaka and Islamabad, together radical lumpen elements of Jamaat and clever military cliques came together in this cause. Hence, defying popular aspirations of people, state power was grabbed. The incumbent illegitimate regime lacking popular mandate, amended Banga Bandhu's constitution to declare Bangladesh an Islamic republic in 1977 under Zia ur Rahman.
It is difficult to say whether Zia and current BNP have perennially represented a component of
Bangladesh Army and society who have prided in their unique Bengali
"Islamic" identity or recourse to Islamic identity was an act of sheer opportunism for grabbing and retaining power through every possible means. Their association with Pakistan is inevitable even if the kind of Islamic cloak that they wear may be far more sophisticated and subtler than their Punjabi counterparts.
Elitist BNP's association with Jamaat, despite being paradoxical, is somehow comparable to Pakistan's Military-Mullah complex, where the two share a symbiotic relationship. Since Awami League had significant support base among masses and it was always in a position to mobilize people on the streets since the days of freedom struggle, BNP neither had a record like this nor an experience of mass movement and not even a rudimentary capacity in this direction. It had not even existed prior to liberation of the country or contributed to it.
Hence, it had no option but ally with Jamaat and to compensate absence of its presence at grassroots level. This was the only way for it to challenge the nation-wide organisational infrastructure of Awami
League. Till date, Jamaat has enormous street prowess and committed following.
With nearly 4 to 5 % of total vote base, it always mobilizes all its members on
streets and used them to unleash violence to intimidate almost entire
citizenry. BNP with the help of Jamaat can at least demonstrate comparable mass support on the street at least for the optics.
INFLUENCE OF PAK MILITARY ESTABLISHMENT ON SECTIONS
OF BD ARMY
A
significant section of military and security force officers of Bangladesh have
always shared a close nexus with Pakistani Army and even some of its Western patrons. This is despite consistent humiliation of Bengali officers by their Punjabi counterparts prior to liberation of the country. Following 1975 coup and until 2008, when Sheikh Hasina returned to
power, Military exchanges between Pakistan-Bangladesh Armies were far too
regular. These had helped forge closer associations and heal some of the wounds and earned respect for Bengali officers. But at the same time, it had offered opportunities to Pakistan to
create strong support base or network of influence in Bangladesh Army.
A
section of Bangladeshi Generals, following independence, always perceived India as the biggest
threat to security and sovereignty of Bangladesh by its sheer geographical proximity and size. Some
also fancied privileges and powers enjoyed by their counterparts in Pakistan.
But still majority of them prefer to be professional soldiers. None serve a
better example than Moeen U Ahmed in 2007 who avoided all temptations of a
direct takeover when Caretaker dispensation of Iajuddin backed by outgoing PM
Khaleda Zia had collapsed. Despite being an appointee of Khaleda Zia and
Tarique Rahman, he refused to be a party to rig polls. He rather oversaw
preparation of fresh electoral rolls, elimination of bogus voters, removal of
local ruffians, toughies and compromised civilian officers as well as all
those, including Tarique Rahman, who could interfere with free and fair polls.
December 2008 polls were probably the fairest election in the history of
Bangladesh. It had seen return of Sheikh Hasina with thumping majority. But the Army Chief had quietly gone home on retirement after doing his job for for the country.
Yet
soon after her return to power, Hasina had faced a precarious threat from
suspected Islamist elements within the Bangladesh Military. They had engineered a
massacre in Bangladesh Rifles to induce a mutiny against Sheikh Hasina Government sometime in early 2009. Scores of soldiers
had been killed. There existed a serious threat to Hasina's life and her regime. But
she had handled the situation with exceptional courage and grit to emerge
stronger.
RAPPROCHEMENT WITH PAKISTAN AS PRAGMATIC STRATEGY
The
Islamist Bengali nationalists- both Generals and politicians have - have
consistently advocated a rapprochement with Pakistan as a pragmatic nationalist
strategy. There may be underhand and invisible dimensions to such dynamics,
involving other extra regional powers as well. But on principle, they seemed
driven by the assumption that physical distances with Pakistan, following
separation, had eliminated the space for conflict with that country.
Simultaneously, Islam offered a stronger bond and common identity. Besides, with help of Pakistan and its patrons and associates, multiple opportunities could be accessed for both private and national gains. Bangladesh could navigate better both in the Western world and oil-rich Islamic nations where Pakistan enjoyed far more goodwill. On the other hand, a much larger India in the
immediate neighbourhood seemed to pose an existential threat.
However, Islamic nationalism alongside aspiration for territorial expansion at the cost of Hindu majority India was not something entirely new that BNP had invented. Many Bengali Islamists who were fighting for Pakistan prior to partition of India were advocating the same. There was elaborate intellectual justification for the same in vernacular media and literature. Recent extremist call for takeover of North East India is not new. Islamist Maulana Bhashani had advocated it in 1920s and 1930s, describing the entire undivided state of Assam as lebensraum (natural habitat) for Bengalis Muslim.
Further, the total habitable landmass available in Bangladesh has been far too little for its people. Hence, steady influx of illegal Bangladesh immigrants under Pakistani rule as well as BNP-Jamaat rule may have been part of this unwritten strategy to alter demography of bordering parts of India before eventual take over. Similarly, safe sanctuary and support that was offered to secessionist groups from North-East India under BNP-Jamaat or military rule confirms the larger agenda of destabilisation. Leaders of many of insurgent groups from Northeast India had shared a nexus with Pak ISI. Some of these got exposed in media. The most notable was a prominent Northeast insurgent leader who was caught in a South-East Asian capital while travelling from Karachi on a fake passport at a time when he holding peace talks with India.
Today, it has been comprehensively established that the entire dynamics of armed insurgency in North-East India was not entirely indigenous. Without external support from Pakistan and other forces and safe sanctuaries in Bangladesh, it could never have sustained. This was part of a much more comprehensive infrastructure for an all-out diffused
irregular covert war to bleed and cripple India. Indirect control or influence over state
machinery helped use the territory of Bangladesh for both strategic security goals and
mercenary organised crime activities.
During
non-Awami League rule, Bangladesh Army was known for carrying out military
exercises targeting India and indirectly referring it in somewhat derogatory
language. Most Indian strategic experts never took it seriously. They
maintained that Bangladesh Army had to justify its existence and India being
the only major neighbour, that posed a degree of threat to Bangladesh, their
military exercises were geared against India.
However,
Pakistani influence over a section of Bangladeshi Army/Security officers has always been a cause of concern for stability and security of Bangladesh as well as
this region. In one of my media interviews in 2023, I had mentioned about
this aspect. I had called for secular-cultural nationalists to be careful. I
remember a famous interviewer asking a counter question from me and virtually
dismissing my assessment.
Nevertheless,
a high percentage of Bangladeshi soldiers still derive pride in legacy of their
freedom struggle. Excesses committed by Pak Army to impose their linguistic and
racial superiority over Bengalis remains etched in consciousness of Bangladesh.
But the current caretaker regime's proximity to Pakistani military
establishment has been more than obvious. Besides, there seems a major attempt
expel cultural nationalist elements from all the security forces of the country
and induct a large number of even untrained incumbents with hardcore Islamic orientation and
outlook and install them in key positions. This is likely to seriously destroy
the professional character of security forces of Bangladesh. It also hints at
possible attempts to forcibly alter the very character of Bangladesh state and
society forever.
BNP'S IMMINENT RETURN TO POWER
As Bangladesh braces towards the forthcoming polls scheduled on February 12th this year, BNP’s return to power and election of Tarique Rahman as Prime Minister is foregone conclusion. The election is only a formality aimed at garnering a facade of legitimacy as the most powerful force and real liberator of Bangladesh Awami League has been thrown out of electoral arena through a ban, Hence, only some last-minute miracle derail BNP's return to power.
Elections
have rarely been free, fair and inclusive in Bangladesh. In this context,
call for inclusive elections by Tarique Rahman appears only a posturing. All
key institutions of state have already been taken over by the current caretaker
regime through loyal cronies. Caretaker dispensation itself appears a proxy of Islamic nationalists led by BNP and Jamaat rather than an independent entity.
The current dispensation has repeatedly confirmed that Awami League, which has always enjoyed support base of almost 40% of the
total electorate even during the worst of its times, shall not be allowed to
contest the forthcoming polls.
Rahman
own track during his mother’s regime in 2001-06 does not inspire much of a hope
for either better governance or restoration of a stable democracy or even good
ties with India. During that period, Rahman had gained an infamy for
brazen interference in governance process. He was known for openly insulting
senior functionaries of the state and did not spare even the then Army Chief.
His collusion with organised criminals, radicals and their external Islamist
patrons like Pakistan were well documented. Given far too open association
of India with Sheikh Hasina, and Rahman's own political support base, it would be too naive to expect a drastic change
in his approach. Nevertheless, one can hope against hope that age and
experience may have mellowed him and he may lean on India and its goodwill rewrite history and work in the best interest of his country instead of acting as vehicle of Pakistan or any other force.
As
a shrewd strategist, Rahman has been credited with scripting the downfall of
Sheikh Hasina. He is believed to have harnessed the longstanding associations
of BNP as well as Pakistani military establishment to unleash sustained
propaganda to discredit Sheikh Hasina Govt in the West and mobilize support of
Western and other establishments to topple the regime through street violence.
Simultaneously, he, with the backing of his regional and global patrons, kept
alive the support base of BNP and Jamaat in Bangladesh, even amidst all round
attacks by Sheikh Hasina dispensation.
Given the prevailing internal equations in Bangladesh, BNP and Jamaat are expected to do their best to eradicate Awami League both politically and ideologically for their own survival. This does not augur well either for Bangladesh or the region. It will test the mettle of even the best among geopolitical strategists to induce an alteration in course of events in the best interests of Bangladesh.
ATTEMPTS TO CHANGE THE NARRATIVE ABOUT FREEDOM STRUGGLE
While
BNP-Jamaat, on one hand, and Awami League and cultural nationalists, on the
other, have always shared extreme hatred towards each other. But for the first
time in history of Bangladesh, there has been an attempt to change the very
narrative about Sheikh Mujib led freedom struggle of the country.
The
current caretaker dispensation, and the forces behind it, have stretched their
disdain towards rule of law, democracy and minority rights to destroy even the
legacy of father of the nation. Early this year, they razed to the ground
residence turned museum of “Banga Bandhu” Sheikh Mujib at 32, Dhan Mondi in
Dhaka in full presence of security forces. The latter acted only as moot
spectators.
Caretaker
regime appears to be systematically attacking every symbol of freedom struggle
of Bangladesh. Its backers have called for even dropping the current national
anthem of the country penned by Rabindra Nath Tagore. People chanting “Joy
Bangla”, the slogan that had united Bangladeshis in their freedom struggle,
have been attacked. A narrative is being built to paint “Banga Bandhu”
Sheikh Mujib as fascist villain and power grabber whereas Zia ur Rahman,
husband of Khaleda Zia, and Islamists as real liberators and saviours of
Bangladesh.
SPATE OF RECENT VIOLENCE
On
December 26, 2025, the spokesperson of India’s Ministry External Affairs quoted
a figure of 2900 violent attacks against Hindus and other minorities.
Knowledgeable elements within Bangladesh maintain that the actual figure may be
in excess of 4000 as there is massive under reporting. The country has
witnessed a frenzy of Islamist attacks throughout the nation. These are
inadequately reported due to absence of media presence in many inaccessible
remote places as well as undeclared media censor. Awami League activists have
also been targeted, and many are running for their lives. Muslims seeking to
report or resist attacks against Hindus have been specifically
intimidated.
‘The
Bangladesh Hindu Buddhist Christian Unity Council (BHBUC) had reported 2,442
incidents of violence against religious and ethnic minorities between August 4,
2024, and June 30, 2025. These included murders, rapes, vandalism of places of
worship, forced evictions besides attacks on minorities. The report cites that
within the first fortnight of ouster of Hasina, 2,100 incidents violent
incidents had been reported between August 4 and August 20, 2024. These
included 1,769 communal attacks.’ Some impartial Hindu NGO activists during
private conversation on Jan 01, 2026, have placed the total figure of those
killed during caretaker regime to anywhere between 3000 to 12000.
Simultaneously, they claim that over few hundreds of thousand Awami League
activists and supporters have been detained with figure of daily arrests
touching three to four thousands. Even though many inconsequential detainees
have also been released, prisons of the country are far too over-crowded. They
lament hostility of global and Western NGOs and media that highlights only
excesses committed by Hasina Govt.
Though
state authorities have denied figures of arrests and killing but there is no
credible data available in this direction. Ahmadiyyas, Buddhists, Christians,
and indigenous peoples in the Chittagong Hill Tracts have also faced violence
and discrimination. Homes, temples, and places of business have been routinely
destroyed, looted and vandalised. Desecration of Hindu idols have become a
norm. A minor sample of hate and intolerance towards free speech was manifest
in burning down of independent media house like “Prothom Alo’’ that had been
equally critical of Sheikh Hasina under her rule.
On
lines of Pakistan, Blasphemy accusations have been levelled over private
disputes and social media has been used to mobilise and trigger mob violence.
Caretaker Govt has made too few arrests and downplays the scale of the violence
while outwardly reiterating its commitment to protect minorities.
FORMER PM HASINA CANNOT ESCAPE THE BLAME
Ousted
Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina cannot escape the blame for the situation in which
Bangladesh finds itself today. She blundered on certain cardinal principles of
statecraft and security even though her administrative efficiency had pushed
Bangladesh to unprecedented levels of economic growth, which was 6.38% annually
during 2009-2023. This had significantly bolstered per capita income of people.
Simultaneously, Bangladesh had risen in HDI global rankings from 147 in 2008 to
129 in 2024.
Some
argue that such output was still sub-par compared to potential of that country.
But anything comparable had eluded Bangladesh on account of persistent
turbulence or direct and indirect Islamist and military rule since 1975 until
2008, with an intervening lackadaisical five- year tenure of Hasina from 1996.
Her supporters claim that 1996 tenure of Hasina was inconsequential due to
stronger grip of her political opponents on most key institutions of state. But
since 2009, she had attempted to systematically rid many institutions of
BNP-Jamaat influence. But still it was insufficient.
Amongst
charges of personal excesses, cronyism, autocratic arrogance and brute
manipulation of institutions to secure electoral victories, especially in 2018
and Jan 2024 polls, Hasina and her associates had failed to assess and
anticipate a lot of issues. These include prowess of her rivals as well as
threats to her regime. They also miscalculated the wider acceptability and
sustainability of the instruments that she was using to retain power. She
physically eliminated many of her key rivals by engineering capital punishment
to them through not so credible judicial process. Imprisonment of political
rivals before polls on questionable grounds undermined sanctity of her
electoral victories.
Bangladesh
needed high quality statesmanship to dismantle the overall infrastructure of
organised crime, radicalism and institutionalized corruption that had always
fed her political-ideological opponents. She fell short on that.
In
between, she had also dabbled with Qoumi Madrassas to apparently wrest at least
a component of support base of Jamaat and BNP. But the move backfired and many
of the products of these very Qoumi Madrassas were at the forefront of student
agitation that overthrew her regime. In course of my observations at the
platform of a Kolkata based think tank last year, I had emphasized the
constraints of existing political system in warding off the crisis in
Bangladesh. It included lack of any credible opposition to Hasina within and
outside the party. I have always argued that great statespersons must fade out
after one or two tenures, and they must nurture a worthy protege. This is
critical for not only their personal credibility but credibility and
sustainability of their larger goals. Probably this is too idealist to expect
in the prevailing global environment where likes of Lincoln or Garibaldi or
Gandhi or Sun Yat Sen or Mandela no longer exist.
Many
external geopolitical factors were also added to her disadvantage. But poor
statesmanship and her inability to surround herself with right advisors had
pushed her into an ivory tower where she got far too detached with the reality.
This engineered a number of miscalculated decisions and questionable activities
on her part. Her underhand dealings with few not so reputed businessmen
particularly tarnished her image.
In
the process, she squandered away a wonderful opportunity that fate had offered
her to re-script the very destiny of the country for whose liberation her
family had shed so much blood along-side sacrifices of lives of thousands of
Indian soldiers and millions of Bangladeshis.
Nevertheless, Sheikh Hasina has been a brave statesperson who attempted something extremely difficult. Personally she appeared incorruptible. She kept her children out of politics even though her son rendered few services at the end pro bono. She tried to protect her support base among freedom fighters by granting some entitlement to their progenies in the form of reservations. This triggered student movement against her.
Hasina lacked wise and courageous advisors who could dispassionately
discuss issues with candor in her presence. Yet given the enormity of
challenges that she faced as Bangladeshi PM, she did extremely well on many
fronts. But she failed miserably on few critical ones. I have highlighted these
in my observations at platform of Tillotoma Foundation of Kolkata in 2024.
Sheikh
Hasina's failure should serve as a lesson for all powerful statesmen all over
the world. Luxuries of normal human frailties and psychological weaknesses like
political narcissism, vanity or intolerance to well-meaning powerful ideas or
favouritism may not have much consequences for entitlement driven politicians
in stable polities. But these are dangerous and simply unaffordable for
statespersons saddled with formidable threats and challenges, especially if
they aspire to rewrite fate of their people and their nation. Enormity and
intensity of threats posed by radicalism, organised crime and irregular warfare
in this region is far too formidable. There are no readymade solutions to
these. But recurrent failures have potential to invite incalculable human
miseries across a much wider divide.
PRIORITIES FOR INDIA
The above observations demonstrate that what Bangladesh is facing amounts to sustained irregular and diffused covert war against democracy and development by Islamist forces. Nevertheless, any instability and turmoil in this region impacts security and progress of India as well as plight of masses on this subcontinent. The developments in Bangladesh are worrying not only for economic progress and social tranquility in that country but may vitiate stability and security environment in this region.
While India has never claimed anything akin to Monroe doctrine, it has a special stake in stability in each of its smaller neighbours lest their territory is used for anti-India activities or retard overall progress of this region. Pakistan remains a thorn in the flesh in this direction. Its very existence, identity and outlook has been shaped by irreconcilable hate towards India and it appears part of a larger geopolitical-security objectives of extra regional powers. Hence, successive Indian Governments have been investing in smaller neighbours to ensure that each of these remain outposts of security for India rather than a launchpad for hostile activities either by Pakistan or other extra regional powers or non-state mercenary entities.
I have highlighted significance of secularism in Bangladesh in the context of Islamic radicalism and sustained terrorism in name of Islam by Pakistan. Given the larger tectonic shifts in the global geopolitical equilibrium, where United States no longer appears all that favourable towards India and Chinese strategic psyche is such that it is bound to do everything possible to keep India engaged in avoidable internal and external conflicts, a hostile Bangladesh can be much more problematic than what it has been in the past. While we may not see return of status quo ante of pre-2007 era, when 40 odd terrorist groups were operating on Bangladeshi soil but the potential challenges shall be serious. The nature of irregular warfare and organised crime have evolved. hence, there may be more trouble and disturbance at one level and greater pressure on law enforcement agencies through means other than terrorism. The ongoing attempts to re-kindle anti-India sentiments shall definitely complicate security challenges, causing avoidable sufferings for people.
Liberation of Bangladesh in 1971 had offered a big respite to India from a series of provocative actions from East Pakistan. But this respite was short lived because following military coup in 1975 and intensification of covert proxy war by Pakistan, the territory of Bangladesh was used to destabilise the whole of North-East India for decades. But relatively longish tenure of Hasina since 2009, despite all its flaws, ensured end of sanctuaries for the secessionists and criminal groups from the North East. There also a major drop in use of Bangladeshi territory for anti-India organised crime and terrorism activities. But some of the core elements of these radical groups were believed to have crossed over to West Bengal. Resurgence of Jamaat and BNP in Dhaka is certainly going to offer them a big boost.
Further, unlike any other older civilisation, India has a unique benevolence embedded in its DNA. While, other major powers have sought to subjugate, colonise and plunder smaller states, Indian state has always tried to share dividends of its innovations and strengths. As per media reports, Indian EAM had conveyed a message to Bangladesh that 'India's growth lifts this region'. He later cited how India helped other neighbors while they were distress on account of Covid or natural calamities or debt trap diplomacy. What he said was not a ritual.
Spectacular rise of Bangladesh over one decade was largely on account of its closer linkages with India. India has granted tens of billions of dollars worth Line of Credit to Bangladesh besides supplying over 1.16 GW cheaper power, favourable water deals as well as Land Boundary Agreement when India ceded 111 enclaves in return for 51. The territory that India received was only 40% of what it conceded. There may not be any example of a more powerful neighbor making such unilateral concessions.
While EAM's message should make some impact on Bangladesh but given the psyche and outlook of BNP-Jamaat, as well as larger dynamics in the region, it may be insufficient to alter their longstanding outlook and approach towards India. Goodwill, generosity and good intent in itself have never been adequate to earn respect and cooperation in geopolitics. Fear, and tangible and real fear, always induce greater love. While India should never seek reciprocity with smaller states but should not either tolerate a blackmail or threat from any of the neighbours or external forces.
The current caretaker regime and its backers have been consistently provoking India and showing disrespect. What India is facing in Bangladesh is a clear extension of irregular and diffused covert war. It can neither be won by simple diplomacy nor military strikes are possible in all such situations. Hence, as a great power, India needs to deploy a combination of innovative instruments and strategies to not merely deal with external entities but even influence and shape external institutions and psyche to the extent required and feasible.
Further, India's concerns in Bangladesh cannot be restricted to security of minorities alone. While minorities are important and their security is hallmark of internal stability of that country and, given the unique dynamics of the region, it also implies absence of animosity towards India. But India should neither box its concerns to this issue nor should it be naive enough to expect the current oppressors of minorities to heed to appeals beyond a point.
India needs strong institutional capacities and will to kill radicalism within and beyond its borders. This is an existential necessity for its security and evolution as a distinct state and civilisation. A beginning in this this direction can be made by cleansing the existing institutions and harnessing wisdom some of the highest achievers/contributors to build progressively better professional capacities in the domain of statecraft.
Simultaneously, India also has to be aware of strategic and tactical goals of extra regional powers. Cooks island and Chittagong port or Cox's Bazar are critical for military security of India. There are indicators that extra regionals powers are seeking a foothold here. Negative public sentiments against India in Bangladesh or unrestrained illegal immigration from there have been impacting our internal security through a variety of ways. For example, Bangladesh was far more populous than Pakistan in 1947 and it remained so until 1971. Today Pakistan has 50% more population (255 million plus) than Bangladesh (177 million). Intriguingly, the population growth rate of Bangladesh has remained low since 1990s and yet 2/3rd of people are youth since the turn of the century. This is simply not possible.
It is also clear that large scale illegal immigration has been taking place from Bangladesh since too long. In early 2000s, media guestimates had placed the number of illegal Bangladeshi immigrants in India at more than 50 million. This figure at current is guesstimated to be anywhere between 120 to 150 millions. Accelerated economic development in Bangladesh had significantly curbed the level of illegal immigration. But revival of Lebensraum strategy, amidst economic downturn in Bangladesh, is likely to witness a spurt in illegal immigration.
Hence, Indian stakes in Bangladesh are much more comprehensive requiring deployment of complex and subtle but effective instruments to pursue these. I shall not like to spell out further details in this direction. But I believe that a tactical and cosmetic approach, though important in the interim, is no replacement to a long-term robust strategic approach, driven by the highest principles of statecraft. I have highlighted and explained these principles of statecraft in my write ups.
*********************************
