What India needs to know about Bangladesh

The movement that toppled Sheikh Hasina is not an Islamist revolution. The students at the forefront of the movement are committed, conscientious patriots who wish to see nothing more than a functional, fair and free Bangladesh. They are democrats and they wish to see a truly democratic Bangladesh, as do all Bangladeshis. They are the furthest thing imaginable from Islamists or militants. Neither is Bangladesh an Islamist country nor a hotbed of militancy.

Yes, it is a Muslim-majority country, and yes, their religious faith is a key component of the identity of many, possibly most Muslim Bangladeshis. But that doesn’t make them radicals or anything other than God-fearing, law-abiding men and women who simply want to live their lives in peace and in harmony with their neighbours.

Hindus are not in danger

Yes, in the initial chaos after Sheikh Hasina fled the country, there was a short period of anarchy and lawlessness and, yes, unfortunately some of those targeted were Hindus. But the notion that Hindus were the subject of some kind of pogrom and that targeting them was an integral part of the revolution is fiction.

Things have calmed down considerably and important as reports of minorities coming under attack were, the accounts of Muslims and Hindus teaming up to protect temples and minority neighbourhoods were far more typical and noteworthy. Things are far from perfect in Bangladesh when it comes to minority rights, but minorities in Bangladesh are much safer than, say, in India.

No anarchy

Contrary to popular belief, Bangladesh has not descended into a Hobbesian state of anarchy since the ouster of Sheikh Hasina. Her sudden decision to flee did initially create a power vacuum that resulted in a very unstable situation for some days. But with the interim government under Dr Muhammad Yunus in place, things are becoming more stable every day, even though the challenge of maintaining law and order remains considerable.

It doesn’t help that a decade of Awami League corruption and misrule has left all institutions in a shambles. That said, given the fragility of the situation—there was no police on the streets for over a week, forcing the students and concerned citizens to partner together to protect neighbourhoods and provide a semblance of order—the fact that there was so little lawlessness during this time was astounding. And things are slowly but surely returning to normal.

Popular support

There is popular support for the interim government of Dr Yunus, who is a widely respected figure, with a reputation for probity, competence and vision. If there is someone who can lead us at this moment in the nation’s history, it is he, and this is widely acknowledged.

There are, of course, divisions within the interim government as there are in society at large, but he is widely seen as the man who can bridge these divisions and bring Bangladesh together. After 15 years of deeply divisive leadership, it’s like a breath of fresh air, and the difference it makes to have someone of his stature at the helm of national affairs is palpable. The country is with him.

Everything is relative

While it has to be acknowledged that things are very far from perfect, Bangladeshis prefer to measure the way things are today against the rampant criminality and corruption of the past decade, to say nothing of the bloodshed of the last month when Hasina turned the guns on her own people. By that measure, we are light years better off than we were before.

It is regrettable, though, that law enforcement and the legal system seem to be using the old playbook—many of the cases brought against former Awami League honchos are flimsy and tendentious.

We hold India responsible

The Bangladeshi people hold India squarely responsible for everything they have suffered in the past decade of increasingly autocratic Awami League misrule. The reason is simple: everyone knows that it was India who propped up the Hasina regime, batting for it internationally, being the first to recognise its bogus re-election, soft-pedalling its dictatorial nature, and defending it and protecting it at every turn.

It was this knowledge that India unquestioningly had her back that emboldened Hasina in her worst excesses and insulated her from the consequences of her misrule.

India’s relationship was with Sheikh Hasina and the government, with no concern for the welfare or opinion of the Bangladeshi people. Hasina was the best of friends to India, and that’s all that mattered. India supported Hasina right to the bitter end, with contemptuous disregard for how this made it look in Bangladesh or the price they would have to pay as a result.

Now with their brilliant Bangladesh policy in ruins, India will need to rebuild the trust and confidence of the Bangladeshi people from scratch.

India is still batting for Hasina

It does not help that weeks after her ouster, India appears to be still supporting Hasina and the Awami League, and that it hasn’t at all come to terms with the catastrophe of its Bangladesh policy. A tide of misinformation and disinformation continues to gush forth from India, attempting to paint the revolution in Bangladesh in the worst possible light.

Sheikh Hasina remains an honoured guest of the republic of India and her son, presumably at the behest of his masters in New Delhi—or at the very least with their approval—openly calls on India to ensure a short-order election in Bangladesh, suggesting to Bangladeshis that India somehow feels that it has that right.

India has yet to come to terms with the fact that it backed a scrub, has lost badly, and that it needs to make its peace both with the interim government and the Bangladeshi people if it wishes to repair its relations with its eastern neighbour.

It’s not just Hasina

Let me be blunt. The Bangladeshi people’s antipathy towards India does not stem solely from its support of Hasina and her atrocities. The Bangladeshi’s beef with India predates 2009, though it has certainly been exacerbated both by the rightward shift in Indian politics and India’s support of the Awami League. Amit Shah’s reference to Bangladeshis as ‘termite’ is only the extreme end of how far too many Indians think of Bangladeshis.

While it is undeniable that India played a pivotal role in 1971, it’s time to give that line a break. Are the French meant to still be crawlingly deferential to the English and Americans? Good luck with that. Why should Bangladesh be any different? And please note that I haven’t even mentioned border killings, water sharing or extortionate power deals.

We want to be friends

All of the above be as it may, Bangladesh neither seeks nor can afford enmity with India. We understand that India has long been an important friend, starting with its invaluable support of our Liberation War in 1971.

We recognise that India is a burgeoning world power and that good relations between the two countries are not just desirable but necessary. We share a 4,000-plus-kilometre border and so many of our issues can only be resolved bilaterally or regionally.

We appreciate that India has security concerns that impact its relationship with us. We also understand that the ties that bind our two countries are far greater than what divides us, and that well-meaning Indians want the best for Bangladesh as do well-meaning Bangladeshis want the best for India.

But if this bilateral relationship is to be repaired, and developed in a way that is frankly imperative for both countries, it will have to be done on the basis of mutual respect, and with a recognition that it is the Bangladeshi people with whom India needs to forge a relationship, not one deeply unpopular and discredited political party and its dictatorial leader.

(Zafar Sobhan is Editor, Dhaka Tribune. The full version of this piece can be read on dhakatribune.com)