Sheikh Hasina’s ouster: The implications for India are grim

For India, Sheikh Hasina’s sudden and unceremonious exit is a huge cause for worry. As India hopes for political stability and normalcy to return in a neighbourhood that is already restive, it has to factor in the following:  

• The anti-quota protest movement had a strong anti-India flavour, because Delhi was seen as Hasina’s principal backing. Slogans like “Bharat jader mamabari, Bangla charo taratari (Leave Bangladesh, those of you whose true motherland is India)” were heard frequently enough. More than 7,000 Indian students studying in Bangladeshi educational institutions, including medical colleges, had to be evacuated; many complained of harassment and intimidation.

  The anti-India mood has peaked now that Hasina has found official refuge in India. So any post-Hasina dispensation, be it a military-backed interim government (as promised by the army chief) or an elected government (if elections can be held soon), is likely to be less than friendly to India — and will be pushed to demonstrate as much to its citizens’ satisfaction.

  This is not only because such a regime will perforce include elements who resent India’s unstinting support for Hasina and her party, but also because none in any post-Hasina dispensation will wish to be seen as friendly to India.

  Nobel laureate Muhammad Yunus, who is expected to play a crucial role in the interim dispensation, has already set the pitch by “feeling hurt when India says the violence in Bangladesh is its internal affair”. So bilateral relations may end, hitting the ditch after soaring to the peak of the ‘Shonali Adhyay (golden phase)’ over Hasina’s 15 years in power, when she comprehensively addressed India’s security and connectivity concerns.

• With BNP (Bangladesh Nationalist Party) chairperson Khaleda Zia, famously Hasina’s bete noire, publicly saying that all treaties signed with India during the Awami League rule will be subjected to scrutiny and review, uncertainty clouds the future of the much-celebrated connectivity projects recently announced by the Narendra Modi government in India. Even if not scrapped, their implementation may slow down under the post-Hasina dispensation, especially if people favourably disposed to nations less than friendly to India occupy positions of importance! Even deals with certain key Indian private entities — such as the power purchase deal with the Adani Group — may face a stiff headwind.

• India will have to seriously review the protection it offers to religious minorities (read: Hindu) and secular Bangladeshis, many of whom may seek refuge in India for understandable reasons. How Delhi will address this issue if the dispensation in Dhaka is less than friendly is anybody’s guess.

• Anti-Indian radicals and ethnic separatists, who were booted out or strongly dealt with during Hasina’s regime, may again look to Bangladesh for sanctuary and support.  

• What happens to the tens of thousands of Indian professionals working in Bangladesh, employed by private entities in that country? Again, this is anybody’s guess. Most will likely look for other pastures, back home or elsewhere in the world; but until such time as they can leave, their security is an issue that New Delhi must factor into its policy calculations.

India’s neighbourhood policy has had a long run-in with rough weather in South Asia in recent years — in Nepal, in Sri Lanka, in Maldives, not to even mention Pakistan. The foreign-office mandarins in Delhi were often given to saying they at least had no worries from Bangladesh.

Now, that will change, and Bangladesh may end up as India’s biggest, nearest headache. The one lesson from this crisis that India can perhaps take is that government-to-government relations are not enough to ensure a steady bilateral relationship unless popular perceptions are appropriately addressed.

With President Mohammed Shahabuddin having just formally dissolved the Bangladeshi parliament, there is now no functional government left in charge. It is uncertain who will decide its future course, the army, foreign powers, the students or business interests.

Our neighbours are clearly out of patience. Hasina was not even given time for a final address to the nation and her residence was left open for the mob to loot and publicly posture in.

Even a statue of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, her father—also the founding father of Bangladesh and its former president—was clobbered down by the mob celebrating its victory.

Radical Islamist cadres by all accounts infiltrated the mob, unleashing a nationwide rampage that the army seemed reluctant to impede. The police and the Awami Leaguers, the religious minorities and secular personalities were all at the receiving end of a collective vendetta, gathering into a storm that Hasina has left untamed and unattended. 

The orgy of violence left its trail of blood and destruction on Monday. In just one day: 

• 786 people have been killed

• 76 police stations have been set on fire and their weapons looted

• 14 bank branches were looted and set on fire

• 30,000 houses belonging to Awami Leaguers and religious minorities got burnt down

• 11,000 business establishments (including TV studios) were burnt down and destroyed

• 37 power grid stations, 39 train bogies and 29 petrol pumps were set on fire

• and 23 Hindu temples and churches have been vandalised.

Even as many of the protestors, including Students Against Discrimination, stand up against this prodigious restraint collapse, the outlook is murky.

Those killed by the angry mobs (reminiscent of the French Revolution?) were mostly Awami Leaguers and security personnel (mostly police but some border guards as well). Though army chief General Waqar u Zaman took “full responsibility” in his address to the nation, promising to restore peace and ensure a smooth transition, the army’s response (or lack thereof) to the violence of yesterday raises more questions than it answers.

It is understandable that a self-respecting army would not like to open fire on unarmed students who are protesting peacefully. But to let lumpen elements who have joined just to loot and pillage have a field day, to allow Islamist radicals to attack police stations and kill fellow citizens in uniform does not reassure us of peace and order about to be restored.

Subir Bhaumik is a former BBC correspondent and a former senior editor of the Dhaka-based bdnews24.com