[🇧🇩] Indo-Bangla Relation: India's Regional Ambition, Geopolitical Reality, and Strategic Options For Bangladesh

[Saif]

Strategies

India devised the following set of strategies to isolate, intimidate, and coerce Bangladesh to submit to Indian domination to reap the benefit of breaking Pakistan:

1. Strategy of intimidation and application of force: The aggressive posture of its border security forces along 4096 km. Indo-Bangla border and its deployment of navy near a disputed Island named South Talpatty in the Bay of Bengal in the early 80s to erect illegal structures are signs that in case Bangladesh fails to accommodate Indian unjust demands causing further deterioration in bilateral relations, India will not hesitate to intimidate and use military power against Bangladesh. Mr. Harun ur Rashid, an ex foreign secretary of Bangladesh, described the episode of illegal occupation of South Talpatty by India as, “While bilateral discussions were pending to resolve the dispute, on May 9, 1981, India sent an armed ship "INS Sandhayak" with one helicopter and some military personnel to the island. Some huts, tents, one aerial mast and one pole bearing the Indian flag were seen erected there. Bangladesh was taken by surprise at India's aggressive mood to claim the island. Bangladesh on 11 May 1981 lodged a strong protest against such unwarranted, unilateral and illegal action of India that was in breach of the agreements reached at the highest political level.”
2. Strategy of supporting secessionist movements in Bangladesh: Chittagong Hill Tracts, which is one tenth of the total size of the country, with its enormous natural resources and strategic geographical location is vital for the existence of Bangladesh. Taking advantage of Chittagong Hill Tracts geographical proximity to India's Tripura state and making full use of discontent of the local Tribal people, India sponsored the worst kind of organized terrorism in the Chittagong Hill Tracts to dismember Bangladesh. The surreptitious Indian involvement in providing money and weapons to tribal insurgents in the Chittagong Hill Tracts since 1976 was acknowledged by Bimal Chakma—a Shanti Bahini official-- in an interview with 'The New York Times' on June 11, 1989. India used the insurgents against Bangladesh as a tool to gain political concessions which it would not otherwise be able to extract from the government of Bangladesh. Finally, Bangladesh entered into a peace agreement with Shanti Bahini in 1997 to end insurgency and to restore law and order in Chittagong Hill Tracts, but the security and intelligence agencies of the country are still convinced that a lot of ex-Shanti Bahini members and other terrorists like Kuki Chin are still getting help from Indian security agencies and are hiding in the North East states of India.
3. Strategy of using Bangladesh to alleviate challenges in the North-East: Because of India's step motherly attitude towards its land-locked North-Eastern states, a growing sense of deprivation, exploitation, and insecurity is prevalent among the people of this region, which has contributed to giving birth to a number of insurgent groups who have taken up arms against their own government for self-determination. India's myopic decision to crush insurgency through military means without finding the root cause to better understand the problem and the absence of a mature policy of providing economic and social incentives to remove inequalities have created myriad of problems causing further alienation of indigenous people. Now India wants to involve Bangladesh in quelling insurgency in its North-East region disregarding the fact that without offering appropriate political and economic incentive package to address the legitimate grievances of the indigenous people no third party can do anything to mitigate the problem and that such involvement bears the risk of antagonizing the insurgents which could seriously undermine the security of Bangladesh.
4. Strategy of Trade Exploitation: In bilateral trade relations with its neighbors, India follows a policy of deriving maximum benefits by securing duty free access for its commodities, by cornering other smaller regional countries by not allowing them to have similar trade privileges, and by imposing non tariff barriers on their exports. The SAARC trade leaders have also termed India as the major roadblock in boosting regional trade. Bangladesh is a victim of the same exploitative Indian trade strategy and suffers from a trade deficit to the amount of almost $9 billion with India because of non removal of tariff and non tariff barriers on her exports. To offset the negative impact of this yawning trade gap, so far India has not offered any significant amount of investments and loans to Bangladesh. Harshly criticizing the Indian attitude toward trade liberalization, Mr. C. Raja Mohan said, “ If the penny-pinching bureaucrats of the Commerce Ministry look beyond the immediate revenue-loss, they could find that freer trade with Bangladesh would facilitate faster growth in Bangladesh and make it a bigger market for Indian goods." Many in Bangladesh and India argue that when two unequal economic powers live together the bigger economy dominates the smaller one, but this notion is obsolete because there are examples in other parts of the world where smaller economies are deriving more benefits from their bigger neighbors through freer access to markets and other trade privileges. One such example is the U.S.-Canada trade relations where Canada being a smaller economy is enjoying a substantial trade surplus with the U.S.A because of latter's mature trade policy to foster improved regional cooperation.
5. Strategy of Unilateral Exploitation of Shared Resources: The Indian strategy of bilateralism and non implementation of water sharing treaties has caused enormous difficulties to its lower riparian neighbors because India uses the prevailing asymmetry of power to its own advantage to deprive its neighbors of their due share of water. This has caused enormous ecological damage to riverine Bangladesh as supply of water during dry season has dwindled at an alarming rate. Renowned water expert, Dr. Ainun Nishat in an interview with a local daily said, “But Article-2 (2) stipulates that India will protect the flow at a specified level. Unless this protection mechanism is in operation the residual flow that arrives at Farakka may not be the flow that matches 40 years average condition. In short, the flow distributed has not been protected by India as per provision of the treaty..............What India is doing now is that it is supplying residual water to Farakka to be shared by Bangladesh as India is either withdrawing water from upper riparian rivers or diverting water flows to other rivers within India by river linking projects.” There are examples where other nations have successfully resolved disagreements over sharing common natural resources based on justice and equality through treaty agreements that not only preserved the rights of the lower riparian countries, but also fostered cooperation in joint exploitation of shared resources for the benefit of the region. 'The Boundary Water Treaty 1909' between the U.S.A and Canada set forth a set of principles for both the countries in using the water of common rivers. As per the treaty, both the countries must agree to any project that would change the natural levels or flows of boundary waters to ensure the legitimate rights of lower riparian country are not violated.
6. Strategy of Eroding neighbors Geographical Advantages: The geographical reality is such that India needs a strategic land transit through Bangladesh to directly link itself with South-East Asia in order to implement its much touted look-east policy, but the risk is such land transit will make Bangladesh a land-bridge between South and South-East Asia and will diminish India's own strategic importance vis a vis Bangladesh. So, India has, with the help of UNESCAP, forced Bangladesh to accept the Asian Highway route alignment that will link India's mainland to North-East and through North-East to Myanmar to implement its look-east policy. This will permanently isolate Bangladesh from South-East Asia, and will also diminish her strategic advantage vis a vis India. There can be no dispute in the veracity of such a strategic move to isolate Bangladesh from South-East Asia because India has already implemented Ganga-Mekong cooperation, which is in line with its look-east policy, that includes its North-East and most of South-East Asian countries but excludes Bangladesh. Excluding Bangladesh from such a project defies the reality of geography, but that has been done with an aim to use Bangladesh as a mere land-corridor between East and North-East India and to permanently isolate Bangladesh from South-East Asia through deceiving her into accepting an uneconomical Asian Highway route.

 

[Saif]

Strategic Planning for Bangladesh

With 17 times larger landmass, 10 times larger population, and 6 times larger military, India is placed in an advantageous position to negotiate with Bangladesh from the position of strength to define the bilateral relation in such a way that suits its own political, strategic, and economic interests. Being the weaker party, Bangladesh has to be creative in devising strategies to utilize India's geographical and security vulnerabilities to her own advantage to deal with the strategic challenges that arise from asymmetry of power with India. Strategic alliances, membership with international security forums, and smart planning to use geographical advantages against India are some of the things that Bangladesh needs to do to maintain a power equilibrium.

Strategic Goals

1. To use geographical advantages to define relationships with regional and extra-regional countries on the basis of equality and mutual interdependence.
2. To promote multilateralism in negotiations and conflict resolutions to ensure balance of power and to protect national interests.
3. To consider maritime zone a vital strategic outlet to connect to the rest of the world, to promote trade and economic interests, to maintain independence in crafting foreign relations, and to avoid being sea-locked by neighboring states.

Strategic Objectives

1. To utilize geographical vulnerabilities of neighboring countries to maximize strategic advantages and minimize strategic vulnerabilities.
2. To fully utilize the advantage of geographical proximity to be a land-bridge between South and South-East Asia to increase economic, political, and strategic opportunities.
3. To actively seek security cooperation from friendly nations under bilateral, regional, and global security framework to reduce disadvantages arising from asymmetry of power with India.
4. To enact relevant laws, set principles, formulate procedures, and raise and equip maritime agencies with appropriate tools to enforce those laws, principles, and procedures to establish sovereignty over the maritime zone of the country.

Strategy Recommendations

The government of Bangladesh will define the responsibilities of different agencies to design, to implement, and to enforce strategies to deal with existing power inequalities with India. They will also establish policies to review the current strategies to evaluate their strengths and weaknesses to ensure effectiveness to respond to current risks and to adjust to future risks.

No single strategy is enough to deal with a country as big and powerful as India, so Bangladesh has to employ several different strategies to diminish India's strategic advantage over Bangladesh through identifying and taking advantage of their security weak points, and through internationalizing bilateral issues to seek help from powerful friends and international forums so as to force India to resolve any disputes on the basis of justice, equality, and mutual respect.

In light of the above discussion, Bangladesh may employ the following strategies to protect her national interest vis a vis India:

1. Diplomacy: To use bilateral diplomatic channel to resolve dispute in an amicable manner; if that fails then use regional forums to raise the issue and to involve other regional actors in the dispute resolution process, and if still that doesn't work then use the United Nations to take diplomatic action to prevent dispute from escalating into conflict.
2. International security forums: To make exhaustive efforts to raise bilateral security issues with India in ASEAN Regional Forum in an attempt to engage all the members of the forum in constructive security dialogue to resolve dispute through confidence building or through preventive diplomacy.
3. Strategic alliance: To form strategic alliance with China to obtain security guarantee for protection against any possible Indian military misadventure, and to obtain political guarantee that China will use her veto power to thwart Indian attempt to use the United Nations Security Council to legitimize its unilateral action with respect to dispute with Bangladesh. Bangladesh will also work with China on matters affecting Chinese security interest based on mutual cooperation, interest, and utmost respect for each others sovereignty.
4. Strategic chicken neck: To consider the 'chicken neck' a strategic asset and to take political decision based on national consensus to not allow India the land transit rights on a bilateral basis through Bangladesh to transport goods, military or industrial, to its North-East region. Bangladesh should follow multilateralism in providing land transit which will give Bangladesh a clear strategic advantage over India because the latter will be forced to rely on Bangladesh for the stability and economic development of its North-East region.
5. Military strength: To gain substantial military power to tie the entire Eastern Command of India in a long term war to cause erosion in its ability to fight a simultaneous war against Bangladesh and China or other friendly forces in the region.

 

[Saif]

Peaceful Endeavors For A Broader cooperation And Partnership

Despite having divergent strategic and security outlook, Bangladesh and India, being so close neighbors and part of so many regional and international forums, should try to take solid actions to minimize differences to foster understanding and cooperation in various socio-economic and security issues for amicable co-existence and regional stability. The following set of actions are recommended to achieve a peaceful bilateral relation:

1. To promote regional cooperation to harness water resources for the benefit of agriculture and production of electricity
2. To provide duty free access for each others commodities to promote greater economic cooperation
3. To take prompt diplomatic actions to demarcate land and maritime borders in the spirit of justice, equality, and good neighborliness
4. To work closely to combat sea piracy, illegal arms trade, drug trafficking and human trafficking for the sake of regional security and stability
5. To create the culture of non-interference in each others internal affairs to promote trust, confidence, and cooperation​

Concluding Observations

The geopolitical environments of Europe and South-East Asia are different from that of South Asia for the fact that the major European and South-East Asian nations have already discarded their regional ambition in favor of building regional community based on equality whereas in South Asia India still is adamantly pursuing its big power ambition and is therefore guided by the principles of domination making it impossible to build a regional community based on equality. Bangladesh, being the 8th largest country by population in the world and having an economy larger than that of combined economies of Myanmar, Nepal, Bhutan, Sri-Lanka, and Maldives should assiduously strive to achieve a significant power status in South Asia through creatively using her strategic geographical location and competitive advantages. Any deficiency in bargaining power vis a vis India should be corrected through economic and political alliances with China and South-East Asia.

 

[Bilal9]

‘India Out’ campaigns simmer in Bangladesh amid election fallout​

Calls to boycott Indian goods in Bangladesh follow allegations of Indian interference in national elections.

Grocery stores have been unable to sell Indian-made chips [Al Jazeera]
By Faisal Mahmud
Published On 7 Feb 20247 Feb 2024

Dhaka, Bangladesh – Amid allegations of Indian interference in national elections, there’s a call to boycott Indian goods in Bangladesh.

Last week, a supplier for the Indian consumer goods giant Marico faced a chilly reception in Dhaka’s Panthapath area. Grocery shops, usually eager to stock their shelves with its hair oil, cooking oil, body lotion and other products, refused to take new deliveries.

“Sales of Parachute oil, a Marico bestseller, have plummeted to almost zero in recent weeks,” local shopkeeper Aman Ullah said. “Indian products just aren’t moving. We’re stuck with unsold stock and won’t be restocking.”

Another shop owner who requested anonymity revealed a deeper reason: “I don’t want to sell Indian products any more.” He cited YouTube videos advocating a boycott of Indian goods, which he wholeheartedly supported.

Simmering anti-India sentiment in Bangladesh has boiled over in the past decade, culminating in public displays such as celebrations in Dhaka last year after India’s loss in the Cricket World Cup final.

But after last month’s elections in Bangladesh, in which Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina secured a fourth term while the opposition boycotted the polls, a massive “India Out” campaign was launched, alleging Indian interference in Bangladesh politics.

The Bangladeshi diaspora and opposition groups have fuelled this anti-India movement and advocated boycotts of Indian products. This movement mirrors similar campaigns in the Maldives, where Mohamed Muizzu capitalized on anti-India sentiment to win the presidential election.

In Dhaka, the campaign was launched against the backdrop of India’s traditionally strong ties with Hasina’s government and its strained relationship with the opposition, leading many to believe India favoured the status quo.

Exiled Bangladeshi physician Pinaki Bhattacharya, who fled alleged government harassment in 2018, has emerged as the key figure in this burgeoning social media movement accusing India of interfering in Bangladesh’s recent elections to keep Hasina in power.

Through his more than two million followers across social media platforms, Bhattacharya launched the #BoycottIndia campaign in mid-January, urging them to join “this monumental endeavour”. His call, emphasizing love of homeland and determination to break free from perceived shackles, resonated with thousands.

​

The anti-India movement has surged online, fuelled by user-generated content. Photos of crossed-out Indian products like Amul butter and Dabur honey are circulating alongside barcode identification tips to boycott these goods. A single post highlighting the 890 prefix used in barcodes for Indian products garnered more than 1,000 shares, showcasing the movement’s online reach.

Why did the campaign gain traction?​

The Indian High Commission in Dhaka declined Al Jazeera’s request for a comment on this anti-India campaign.

At a Mumbai forum on January 30 with Indian External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar, attendees raised concerns about India’s foreign policy amid perceived shifts in regional dynamics, particularly the growing pull of major rival China on neighbouring countries like Bangladesh and the Maldives.
Jaishankar downplayed concerns about foreign policy shortcomings but conceded the competitive reality. He pointed out that China’s geographical proximity naturally grants it influence over neighbouring countries like the Maldives, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh.



Screengrab from Facebook of online movements advocating boycott of Indian products

State Minister of Information and Broadcasting and lawmaker from the ruling Awami League Mohammad A Arafat, too, dismissed the concerns saying Bangladesh had received global attention because of the unprecedented fact of a fourth term for the ruling government.

“If I have to talk about other country’s interest in our local politics, then the first name I would mention is the United States which even declared a Visa restriction policy based on Bangladesh election. On the other hand, India, from the very onset officially stated that Bangladesh’s election is its internal matter and it has no say in it,” Arafat said.

Obaidul Quader, general secretary of Awami League told Al Jazeera that the “India out” campaign is run by opposition parties who instead of taking part in the election blaming “India for their misfortune.”

“They [the opposition parties] have this trump card of bashing India if anything goes against them,” said Quader, “I don’t think common people of Bangladesh support this campaign. They know that Awami League will never work against the interest of people.”

The burgeoning anti-India campaign, meanwhile, is finding traction within Bangladesh’s domestic political landscape, raising concerns about potentially destabilising Bangladesh’s economy and impacting regional relations.

Gono Odhikar Parishad, a rising political force aligned with the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP)-led opposition, is promoting the boycott movement. Party leader Nurul Haque Nur declared at a recent rally in Dhaka that “We all have to start an ‘India Out’ campaign'” while alleging Indian interference in the recent elections.

Rumeen Farhana, international affairs secretary of the BNP, told Al Jazeera that the people of Bangladesh never liked India’s interference in Bangladesh politics. “It’s now crystal clear that India did everything possible to keep the regime in power since 2014,” she alleged.

Resentment against India reached a boiling point in Bangladesh after Hasina’s Awami League secured a resounding victory in the January 7 elections, capturing 223 seats out of 300 in parliament. Critics alleged the process lacked legitimacy due to the opposition’s boycott and the presence of numerous Awami League-backed independent candidates, raising questions about the fairness of the vote.

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi offered swift congratulations to both Hasina and “the people of Bangladesh for the successful conduct of elections”, endorsing the outcome. In contrast, Western governments expressed reservations, highlighting the boycott and the lack of a strong opposition presence.


Facebook Screengrab of calls for a boycott of Indian products in favour of Bangladeshi products

Farhana said anti-India public sentiment in Bangladesh goes beyond politics. “The border killing, unresolved water sharing of 53 rivers including Teesta, trade deficit all play roles to that,” she said.

Around 1,276 Bangladeshis have been killed and 1,183 injured by India’s border forces since 2010, according to human rights organisation Odhikar. Then there are the decades-old unresolved water-sharing agreements for 53 transboundary rivers in addition to Bangladesh’s massive trade deficit with India, all of which have raised concerns about Bangladesh’s sovereignty and economic independence.

Ali Riaz, distinguished professor of politics and government at Illinois State University, told Al Jazeera that India’s unqualified support of the Awami League and Hasina during the 2024 elections has raised questions among many citizens about “whether it has compromised the country’s sovereignty”.

However, Sreeradha Datta, a professor at the Jindal School of International Affairs in Sonepat, India, refuted the claims of India’s “unqualified support” and said the Awami League was “creative in going past the polls even if India [had] not agree[d] to recognise the election”.

“China and so many others congratulated PM Hasina right after the election, so would that make any difference if India didn’t support it?” she asked.

​

The economic fallout​

Analysts, meanwhile, pointed out that boycotting Indian goods could have major repercussions for the economic relationship between the two countries.

India is a major exporter to Bangladesh with annual trade historically exceeding $12bn. Additionally, Bangladesh relies heavily on India for essential commodities, and the two governments are currently in talks on an annual quota of imports of Indian farm products.

Calling the anti-India campaign a “political stunt”, Munshi Faiz Ahmed, former chairman of the Bangladesh Institute of International and Strategic Studies, a state-funded think tank, told Al Jazeera that the economic fallout of boycotting Indian products will be more severe for Bangladesh.

“I don’t think any rational Bangladeshi would opt for taking part in this campaign. India is our neighbouring country, and we are heavily dependent on them for our everyday essentials like rice and onions. We are dependent because we get those products at the cheapest prices because of geographical proximity,” Ahmed said, adding that sourcing those products from somewhere else would cost much more.

Jyoti Rahman, an Australia-based economist told Al Jazeera that the “India Out” movement may be politically important to the extent that “it sends a strong message to the Indian policymakers” about growing discontent in Bangladesh but the “economic effects are less clear cut”.

Rahman pointed out that despite being India’s fourth largest export destination, Bangladesh still comprises about 3.5 percent of the Indian export market. “Even if all exports to Bangladesh stopped, it probably wouldn’t significantly affect the Indian economy as these products would find a market elsewhere,” Rahman said.

On the other hand, he said, a fifth of Bangladeshi imports are from India, including essentials such as cotton for the garment manufacturing sector, cereals and produce such as onions. “[Looking at] other sources of imports for these products could stoke inflation further,” Rahman said.

However, he highlighted the potential political effectiveness of boycotting non-essential items like tourism, cultural imports like Bollywood movies and consumer products, which he said could benefit domestic industries.

The overwhelming dependence of Bangladesh on India also means that “Indian businesses are vulnerable if such a movement gains traction and support”, Riaz said.

Even if the economic impacts are limited or not immediate, the boycotts will contribute to the public discourse on the role of India in Bangladeshi politics and highlight the unequal relationship, he said. “This is no less important.”

Additional reporting by Abu Jakir

 

[Saif]

Before 'India out' campaign we need to start 'Hasina out' campaign. Because if Hasina remains in power, she will subserve Indian interest by hook or by crook. So, let's kick Hasina out from Gonobhaban.