More than four months have elapsed since Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina was forced to flee Dhaka for India on 5th August, 2024. She had to take this precipitous step in the face of rising student protests which had become increasingly violent over the previous month. Nobel Laureate Dr. Muhammad Yunus was installed as the Chief Adviser in the capacity of the head of the caretaker government on 8th August, 2024. There is no provision for a caretaker government in the Bangladesh Constitution. Two main objectives of the interim administration were to establish peace and ensure security in the country, and hold early elections. Neither of these objectives has been achieved so far. There is no indication as to when the elections might be held. Yunus appears to have made statements suggesting that his interim government could continue for up to four years.
In addition to the continuing and worsening internal strife, relations with India have witnessed a new low, particularly on account of the brutality and assaults against the minority Hindu, Christian and Buddhist communities. Yunus and his administration refuse to acknowledge the reality of this barbarity and violence, notwithstanding the large number of videos and documentary evidence available to this effect. This policy of denial has led to further emboldening of the perpetrators and more atrocities against the minorities.
Islamists and jihadists appear to be having a field day and with the feeble and ineffective leadership of Yunus and his Advisers, the once promising land of Bangladesh appears rudderless. It is clear that Yunus and most of his Advisers have had no previous administrative or governance experience. Most of them have cut their teeth working in the NGO sector or agitation politics. They are finding themselves out of their depth in dealing with the serious political, security, economic and social challenges confronting the country.
During his one-day visit to Bangladesh for Foreign Office Consultations on 9th December, 2024, Indian Foreign Secretary (FS) Vikram Misri held ‘’ frank, candid, and constructive exchange of views with all’’ his interlocutors including Chief Adviser Dr. Muhammad Yunus, Foreign Affairs Adviser and Foreign Secretary. This diplomatic language indicates that Misri did not hold back his punches in outlining India’s concerns about the violence against minorities in Bangladesh and the anti-Indian frenzy leading to the ‘’regrettable incidents of attacks on cultural, religious, and diplomatic properties.’’
Did the United States Engineer the August Coup?
While it might be difficult to marshal conclusive evidence to irrefutably prove the involvement of the US in the August developments, it is clear that the US government was unhappy with the Sheikh Hasina government and desperately wanted to see her back. It is also well known that the US deep state is no stranger to scheming and spawning colour revolutions and regime changes in different parts of the world. It can be safely assumed that the US had a significant motive and role to play in the violent change of government in early August, 2024.
Sheikh Hasina, after her removal in August, 2024, apparently alleged that the United States master-minded her ouster from power and the country after she refused to cede sovereignty of St. Martin Island, which would have given Washington control over the Bay of Bengal. The charge of US involvement is further substantiated by the comments of Muhammad Yunus in his meeting with President Joe Biden during his visit to the US in September, 2024 for the UN General Assembly Session. He paraded two ‘’student leaders’’ at the meeting with Biden and claimed that the change in August, 2024 was meticulously crafted and planned over a long period of time. It laid to rest the argument that the movement to dislodge Hasina was purely homegrown, spontaneous and organic and an offshoot of the anti-quota stir over the few months preceding August, 2024.
It however needs to be recognized that Hasina’s fifteen year-long rule had made her lose contact with the common people and the grass roots. She had become increasingly autocratic and dictatorial. Freedom of press, speech and media, and personal liberties were curtailed. This resulted in considerable disaffection amongst the people which led to the growing street protests, principally by students on the quota issue which came to occupy center-stage. The quota issue erupted not on account of any decision by the government but by a High Court ruling on 5th June 2024. However, Hasina’s timely actions did seek to quell and contain the discontent and alienation amongst the common people on this issue. The student protest movement however was soon taken over by the jihadist elements of Chhatra Shibir, the Student wing of the Jamaat-e-Islami (JeI) party, the extremist Islamist force in the country, leading to relentless and persistent violence. It would appear that if foreign funding and support had not poured into the protest movement, the outreach moves by Hasina would have been successful in containing the unhappiness and angst of the people.
In addition, the US has refused to make any critical comments against the Yunus dispensation for the violence and vandalism against the minority communities in Bangladesh. This was in spite of the fact that this matter was discussed during Biden’s call to PM Modi on 26th August. The matter found a prominent mention in the readout of the discussions issued by India but failed to find a reference in the press release on the conversation by the White House. Moreover, in response to a question on 12th August on the atrocities being committed against the Hindus in Bangladesh, the White House refused to issue either a strong condemnation or a promise to act.
It is obvious that while there is a significant convergence of interests between India and the US, there is not absolute congruence in the policies of the two countries. In the case of Bangladesh, it would appear that core interests of India and the US don’t align. Being next door, Bangladesh is very important for India strategically and for security reasons. Any disturbance or instability there is bound to impact India, whereas the US, located 13,000 km away, is immune to any crisis in Dhaka. Things could change radically with the takeover of President Donald Trump on 20th January, 2025, as he had, during his Presidential campaign, stridently castigated the Bangladesh establishment for its persecution of the Hindus and minorities.
While the constitutional validity of the formation and continuation of the caretaker government continues to be under a serious question mark, the regime change seems to have brought the US, China and Pakistan on the same page with common interests which are inimical to the stability and security of India.
The Churn in Bangladesh
The Yunus government has not been able to effectively tackle the major problems confronting the country. Thus far, Yunus and his team have not demonstrated the requisite leadership or statesmanship.
The way the situation is evolving, it appears possible that many members of the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) and the Jamaat would probably get elected as and when the elections are held. There are strong pressures on Dr. Yunus from many sides, particularly the BNP to hold early elections. Yunus has however appointed several reform Commissions covering areas like the constitution, the electoral system, the judiciary, the police, the Anti-Corruption Commission, and public administration etc. to establish a fair election system and good governance. These Commissions are expected to submit their initial reports next month.
If the BNP and Jamaat-e-Islami (JeI) are elected in large numbers and come to power, it would spell serious trouble for the country. In particular, the Jamaat-e-Islami has an unsavoury past. It opposed the creation of Bangladesh in 1971 and was involved in war crimes during the Liberation War. Despite this, it sneaked its way back into politics because of political expediency, particularly on part of the BNP.
A large number of imprisoned Islamists were set free recently under an amnesty. Among them was an ISIS and Al-Qaida sympathizer, Jasimuddin Rahmani, head of the Ansarullah Bangla Team (ABT) who was convicted on serious murder charges. Upon his release, he lost no time to threaten India with dire consequences. He exhorted all Muslims to fight for the independence of Kashmir and vigorously urged West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee to secede from India. Today, the Jamaat and its off shoots are being courted by China and Pakistan. All this is bound to have medium to long term disastrous consequences for Bangladesh.
In the midst of this upheaval, it needs to be remembered that the majority of Bangladesh population stands for good relations with India. They support a secular administration focused on peace, stability and economic development. Some elements of the interim government and groups like the JeI, Hefazat-E-Islam Bangladesh, Ansarul Bangladesh, Hizb-ut-Tahrir and some more of the same ilk who harbor anti-Indian sentiments, constitute the fringe and radical elements of the population. Several of them who were earlier behind bars were released after the eviction of Sheikh Hasina and are leaving no stone unturned to incite anti-Indian and pro-Pakistan passions. The caretaker government and these groups are conflating anti-Hasina feelings with anti-Indianism and anti-Hinduism resulting in the spate of violent attacks on Hindus and their places of work and worship. These groups are seeking to change the secular, syncretic character of Bangladesh and destroy the spirit of the 1971 liberation movement to take the country towards an Islamic state ruled by Sharia law. It is important for the people of Bangladesh to ensure that in the existing chaos and lawlessness, no permanent damage is inflicted on the democratic, pluralistic and tolerant social fabric of the nation.
As the economy of the country flounders and deteriorates, Yunus will find that the initial generous support extended to him and his Advisers by the people is fast dissipating. His honeymoon with the public will not last more than a few more months, at the most.
India-Bangladesh Relations
India and Bangladesh share deep-rooted bonds of history, language, culture, and multitude of other commonalities. This has however not stopped the bilateral ties from experiencing several tumultuous ups and downs since Bangladesh’s independence from Pakistan in 1971 in which India played a significant role. Bilateral ties blossomed rapidly over the last 15 years since Sheikh Hasina assumed power in 2009. The relations were reflected in an all-encompassing partnership based on sovereignty, equality, trust, and understanding. It evolved as a model for bilateral relations for the entire region and beyond.
There was extensive interaction and exchange between the two countries at the highest political level. The period witnessed intense trade, commercial and economic cooperation promoting two-way connectivity – rail, roads, inland waterways, ports and energy; defence cooperation; tourism; education; health; people-to- people contacts etc.
In the preceding 15 years, the two countries helped beat back militant groups, resolved a thorny boundary and maritime issue and signed a number of infrastructure and power deals. All these advances promoted mutual benefit of the two countries and brought them closer than they had been for decades.
Everything however changed in early August 2024 when Sheikh Hasina’s government collapsed. Today the India-Bangladesh relationship is in serious trouble.
Following Hasina’s departure, a series of communal attacks were reported, particularly targeting Hindus in Bangladesh. These incidents included attacks on temples, houses, and shops belonging to minority communities, as well as looting and murder across several districts in the country. PM Modi strongly raised the issue of protection and security of all Hindus and minorities in Bangladesh with the Chief Advisor when the latter called him on 16th August, 2024. Dr Yunus assured protection, safety and security of Hindus and all minorities in Bangladesh. So far these have proved to be mere words. Yunus and his officials have stated that the media reports of persecution of minorities are highly exaggerated. This has further encouraged the perpetrators to continue their violent actions with impunity. According to Investigations conducted by some Bangladesh agencies, more than 2,000 attacks including personal assaults, killings, abductions, rapes and destruction of properties have taken place on the minority community since Sheikh Hasina fled the country. Serious concerns about the increasing spate of attacks against the minorities, particularly the Hindus have been expressed by law-makers and civil society leaders from the US, UK, Australia, Canada and European nations. The interim government can no longer take refuge behind its rationalization that the accounts are ‘’highly exaggerated’’ or that they are an internal matter of Bangladesh.
The recent arrest of Hindu spiritual leader Chinmoy Krishna Das on sedition charges has added fuel to the already simmering fire. Chinmoy Das, a spokesperson for the Bangladesh Sammilit Sanatan Jagran Jote, remains in custody despite calls from India for his release. The level of intolerance and anti-India sentiment among the common people is evident from the fact that no lawyer was allowed to take up Chinmoy Das’s case in court for fear of reprisals due to threats issued by the Lawyers’ body. In response to India’s expression of strong concern and calls for legal action against the perpetrators, Yunus repeatedly asserted that the attacks are not “communal” but are politically motivated because the Hindus are largely considered AL supporters. This can hardly be a solace or justification for those who are being attacked or whose homes and places of worship and work are being vandalized or torched.
To make matters worse, Pakistan has started making an ingress into Bangladesh. The first cargo ship to travel directly from Pakistan to Bangladesh in 53 years docked at Chittagong port on November 11, 2024. In October, the caretaker Bangladesh government scrapped the mandatory physical inspection of imports from Pakistan. These developments need to be seen in the context of the arms haul confiscated in 2004 in Chittagong. The cargo consisted of around 1,500 boxes of Chinese ammunitions, worth an estimated $4.5-7 million, allegedly meant for the banned militant outfit ULFA (United Liberation Front of Asom) and thought to be masterminded by Pakistan’s intelligence agency, the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI). In yet another move, the Yunus dispensation removed the requirement for Pakistani citizens to obtain security clearance before applying for a visa. In his meeting with Pakistan prime minister Shehbaz Sharif at the UN General Assembly in New York in September, Yunus had stressed on the need to revitalize bilateral cooperation. All these developments further enhance the challenges for India emanating out of Bangladesh.
Some analysts in Bangladesh and India allege that India committed a mistake by putting all its eggs in the Hasina basket. This is a faulty reading of the ground situation. India was required to engage with the government in power in the country. Sheikh Hasina was a democratically elected Prime Minister of Bangladesh. India will continue to deal with whichever government is in power in the country. All decisions taken by the two governments in fields of security, connectivity, trade, education, health, culture etc. were for the mutual benefit of the people of the two countries and not to promote the individual interests of any country or leader. All connectivity and infrastructure projects commissioned by India continue to function for the welfare of the people of Bangladesh. Moreover, India had reached out to all interlocutors in Bangladesh, including the Bangladesh Nationalist Party and most other political dispensations across the board.
Under India’s ‘’Neighbourhood First Policy’’, India has pursued a non-reciprocal and generous policy with its neighbours. Bangladesh has been by far the largest beneficiary of this approach with more than US$8 billion in grants and assistance. Bangladesh sits at the intersection of most of India’s key foreign policy visions – the “Act East Policy”, the doctrine of SAGAR, as well as its Indo-Pacific Vision.
During his visit to Bangladesh on 9th December, FS Vikram Misri informed all his interlocutors ‘’that India desires a positive, constructive, and mutually beneficial relationship with Bangladesh. We have always seen in the past and we continue to see in the future this relationship as a people-centric and people-oriented relationship.’’
He referred to the ‘’mutually beneficial engagement we have on a whole set of issues ranging from trade, commerce, connectivity, power, water and energy, development cooperation, consular cooperation, and cultural cooperation’’ and expressed the confidence that this will continue. He emphasized that ‘’India desires a positive, constructive, and mutually beneficial relationship with Bangladesh.’’
A clear and direct message was conveyed by FS Misri to his Bangladesh interlocutors about India’s redlines regarding the safety and security of the Hindu minority in Bangladesh as well as the imperative of not sheltering insurgencies or militant elements targeting India. It is necessary for the Bangladesh interim government to realize that positive relations with India are hugely beneficial for it and its people in promoting peace, security, economic development and growth. Yunus in his meeting with Misri said that Sheikh Hasina’s statements from Delhi against the interim government raise tension in the society.
Bangladesh FS raised a number of issues with FS Misri including alleged killings of people on the border by Indian security forces, trade barriers, renewal of the Ganga Waters Treaty, sharing waters of Teesta River, ensuring uninterrupted supply of essential commodities, facilitating visas for Bangladeshi citizens, transmission of hydropower from Nepal and Bhutan to Bangladesh, etc. All these requests and more clearly demonstrate the acute dependence of Bangladesh on India.
Conclusion
The change of government in Bangladesh and developments over the last more than four months pose a serious challenge for India. India is already confronting two hostile powers to its West and the North. Bangladesh could emerge as an adversary to the East. If this happens, it will stretch India’s defences to the limit. So far the Bangladesh border is protected by the BSF. In the coming months, India will have to consider whether it needs to depute its army too on certain sections of the six states that adjoin the 4,000 km plus long border with Bangladesh.
Yunus and his group of Advisers appear to be totally inadequate in dealing with the evolving situation. Either they are incapable, or worse still, complicit in what is happening. They need to realize the imperatives of interdependence. Much of Bangladesh’s exports of readymade garments depend for their intermediates and inputs on imports from India. Much of their exports also go to global markets from Indian ports. Most of Bangladesh’s requirements of essential commodities are met by imports from India. It is in the mutual interest of both the countries to have good relations with each other. Bangladesh needs to ensure that it does not become a hub of radicalism, Islamism and jihadism. It should not follow the Pakistani example of becoming an epicentre of terrorism. Security, stability and economic progress are the need of the hour for Bangladesh and its people. India is the best partner for it in realizing these aspirations.
India has followed a calibrated approach of sending out a clear message to Bangladesh to be mindful of India’s security interests and protect the lives and welfare of its Hindu and other minorities. India will need to keep a close watch on developments in the country in the coming weeks and months and take necessary measures as required.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Ambassador Ashok Sajjanhar is Executive Council Member, Mahohar Parrikar Institute of Defence Studies and Analyses; President, Institute of Global Studies; Distinguished Fellow, Ananta Aspen Centre, and former Ambassdor of India to Kazakhstan, Sweden and Latvia.
