Earlier this month, six Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) sent a letter to Josep Borrell, high representative of the European Union for foreign affairs and security policy, and asked him to step in to ensure free and fair election in Bangladesh – if need be, under a caretaker government. The Embassy of the European Union in Dhaka considered it as solely their personal views, not those of the EU. Prior to that, six congressmen sent a letter to US President Joe Biden, asking him to protect the “persecuted” religious and ethnic minorities in Bangladesh. The timing of the letters is noteworthy, considering the visit of the UN Under-Secretary-General for Peace Operations, Jean-Pierre Lacroix, to attend the preparatory conference of the UN peacekeeping ministerial in Dhaka on June 25-26.
Let’s deal with the issues one by one. First, let’s delve into elections under the caretaker government system, then the state of minorities in Bangladesh, and lastly, the geopolitical connotations of the abovementioned letters.
Read more: Letter from 6 members of European Parliament reflects views of signatories, Ambassador tells UNB
Bangladesh Awami League was at the forefront of demanding a caretaker government in 1996. The erstwhile BNP government had to succumb to the popular demand articulated by the Awami League. AL came to power through free and fair election under the non-party caretaker government. In 2001, Awami League handed over the power peacefully, for the first time in Bangladesh’s history, to a caretaker government. AL got 40.13 percent of votes compared to BNP’s 40.97. The former secured only 62 seats and the latter, 193 seats. The Four Party Alliance, including BNP and Jamaat-e Islami, formed the government and got a two-thirds majority in the parliament required for amending the constitution. They raised the retirement age of the chief justice of Bangladesh, so that their chosen Chief Justice of Bangladesh KM Hasan could be the Chief Adviser to the next caretaker government – a move many political analysists refer to as “corrupting” the caretaker government system. The last nail was hammered by Iajuddin Ahmed, the then President of Bangladesh, who assumed the role of chief adviser to the caretaker government. The Supreme Court of Bangladesh declared this caretaker government system “illegal” in 2011.
Without an iota of doubt, our democracy is not perfect. We need to develop our democratic institutions, and we need support from our friends in the democratic West for building and strengthening the democratic institutions. But supporting a cause with no democratic future will not help Bangladesh progress in this regard.
The letter from six US congressmen to President Biden accuses the current Bangladesh government of “persecuting” ethnic and religious minorities along with other allegations. Several noted minority community leaders have already rejected this assertion, calling it “absolutely false projection” of the state of minorities in Bangladesh. Advocate Rana Dasgupta, leader of Bangladesh Hindu Buddhist Christian Oikya Parishad, called the claim “a travesty of truth.” Bangladesh Buddhist Federation called it “baseless and fabricated.” Nirmal Rozario, president of Bangladesh Christian Association, also rejected the six US congressmen’s claim of persecution of the Christian community in Bangladesh.
The Awami League government reintroduced secularism in the constitution of Bangladesh. It also made provisions relating to the protection and advancement of the cultures of ethnic minorities of Bangladesh in the constitution.
The Bangladesh government was not always successful in fulfilling its commitments enshrined in the Chittagong Hill Tracts Peace Accord. However, we must not forget that this peace accord was made possible by the Awami League government back in 1997.
Let’s get to the heart of the problem. We are at a watershed moment in the geopolitical history of Bangladesh. Not by our choosing, our country has become a playground of international politics. It is both comforting and concerning. Comforting, because our economic development along with other things has made us geopolitically important. Concerning, because we have become a bone of contention between China and the US. Earlier, it was thought that BNP was a natural ally of China and Awami League was an ally of India. Interestingly, this has changed due to the dynamic leadership of Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina. She adopted her father’s foreign policy of “friendship to all, malice towards none.” She extended her hand of friendship to both India and China – two regional powerhouses and competitors. She was never hostile to the United States. However, under the Trump administration, the US was folding its carpet of influence in South Asia – relying mostly on India on issues relating to Bangladesh. China has expanded its reach in Bangladesh and other countries in South Asia. Now, Western leaders seem to be waking up to this rise and expansion of Chinese influence in South Asia and beyond. Perhaps they feel the time is ripe for them to mount pressure on Bangladesh, disregarding the concern that this could instigate violence and instability in the region that might hamper their interests as well as those of Bangladesh and its neighbours.
Bangladesh, argues Jared Cohen in his article “The rise of geopolitical swing states” (Goldman Sachs, May 15, 2023), is a geopolitical swing state. The foreign policy stance of the present Bangladesh government, i.e., “friendship to all, malice towards none”, gives it strategic autonomy. It enforces the international relationship dynamics of no permanent friendship or permanent enmity. China opposed Bangladesh’s independence, of course, not to the extent of the US, in 1971. Despite that, Bangladesh never hesitates when it comes to Chinese and American investments. Bangladesh has engaged in multi-alignment, not in non-alignment. Jared Cohen thinks that non-alignment is not possible in today’s world. Perhaps he is right. To protect national interests, however, Bangladesh should remain non-aligned, even in the face of increasing geopolitical pressure – of which, the recent letters of US congressmen and members of the European Parliament are a few examples.
The writer is former chairman of National Human Rights Commission, Bangladesh.