Saif
Senior Member
- Joined
- Jan 24, 2024
- Messages
- 15,397
- Reaction score
- 7,874
- Nation
- Residence
- Axis Group
Is 'push-in' another manifestation of Delhi’s hostile policy?
If Delhi gives an idea loud and clear to Dhaka of what kind of relationship it wants, a new era of bilateral relations may begin
en.prothomalo.com
Is 'push-in' another manifestation of Delhi’s hostile policy?
Khawaza Main UddinDhaka
Published: 17 Jun 2025, 15: 27
Indian border forces BSF wanted to push in 14 persons over the Roumari border at Kurigram. Border Guard of Bangladesh (BGB) thwarted them. 17 May, Boraibari border Collected
No matter what history says, today’s India is forcing a section of its own population to enter into another country through land border illegally, due only to their religious belief and identity.
Muslim men and women from the neighbouring country are being pushed in to no other land than Bangladesh, where more than a million Rohingya Muslim people evicted from another neighbour, Myanmar, have been given shelter.Thus, India’s internal issue is turning into a cross-border dispute apart from the treatment of the Muslims as hostage in its domestic politics.
It cannot be believed that such a move by India’s central government of Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) ahead of the crucial elections in states of West Bengal and Assam that have significant percentage of Muslim voters, is appreciated by democratic, progressive and conscientious people there?
In this phase, Delhi has taken the move to send some Indian Muslims to Bangladesh territory – it all is happening after the political changeover through the July 2024 revolution. There is no reason that the Bangladesh people will not understand that such a move conforms to Delhi’s hostile policy towards Dhaka.
New Delhi has first imposed visa restrictions for the Bangladesh people and at one stage cancelled the transshipment facility through India for Bangladesh businesses.
The Indian godi media (pro-ruling party propaganda) has also launched a campaign to spread rumours and cynicism terming as terrorist or militant activities a successful student-mass revolution that has overthrown a ruler who killed democracy. Earlier, Sheikh Hasina who fled Bangladesh in the face of popular demonstrations, was given shelter in nowhere but Delhi, without showing any sensitivity to the sentiment and emotion of the people of Bangladesh.
In such circumstances, is there any likelihood that the most critical bilateral issues such as sharing of waters of transboundary rivers, border killing, trade imbalance, and smuggling and drug trafficking will remain completely out of sight of Bangladesh?
There is no reason to believe either that the pundits outside of India and Bangladesh, or even the global citizens having a minimum level of common senses, would not be able to read mindset of the Delhiwalas and understand the objectives of their activities.
India now wants to say the people who were being pushed in are actually nationals of Bangladesh and even if many of them have been living in India for many years, they are legally not citizens of India. On making its own citizens stateless, foreign media including the BBC have run reports naming and quoting individual victims and confirmed that the Muslims who were pushed in to Bangladesh are in fact Indian nationals.
If a few of them are found to be Bangladeshi nationals travelling to India, they could have been deported lawfully with due respect. But. Dhaka has no legal obligation to accept the Indian citizens as Bangladeshis only because they are Muslims. Is Indian premier Narendra Modi’s friend Donald Trump welcoming illegal Indian immigrants to the US?
By using its minority population as pawn of chess in domestic and external policies, India as a state and civilization proves its bankruptcy and its leaders and policymakers are doing so, as part of a conscious policy decision.
The attitude of Delhi and a major section of the Indian media towards the Yunus government seemed to be attacking and demeaning when the rest of the world shows high level of respect to the Nobel Peace Price winner.
It seems that Delhi is nowhere near self-realisation about correctness of the action to push Bangladesh towards an unwanted situation, let alone making self-criticism. Rather, India’s standpoint, as well as tactics vis-à-vis Bangladesh such as maintaining hardly any communications with Professor Y8unus-led government at the state level, exposes certain anger, which has originated from the fall of a subservient ruler.
There is no logical ground for India’s anger against the Bangladesh people, instead of the possibility of the opposite. Sheikh Hasina with Delhi’s overt and covert patronisation for more than one and a half decades, had deprived the people of this country of their democratic and human rights; furthermore, the Indian authorities had made all attempts to glorify the one who was a fascist ruler.
One cannot ignore the fact that the aggrieved Bangladeshis had begun ‘boycott Indian goods’ movement immediately after the 2024 parliamentary polls Hasina won with Indian blessings, months before the demonstrations that ousted the iron lady. In such a context, Delhi’s anger against the Bangladesh people can be equated with that of an angry loser. Delhi should have rather had more anger against nuclear Pakistan and a more powerful China, the two neighbouring countries with which India had engangled into border clashes recently.
Showing flexibility to powerful countries and aggression to non-nuclear neighbour is the reflection of Chanakya Kautilya’s policy of Matsanaya according to which big fishes eat up small ones.
The rulers of Delhi have been obsessed with old policy of pre-Christ era, at a time when they should have extended olive branch to the people of Bangladesh so that there is a thaw in the deadlock in bilateral relations.
Japan, Germany and South Africa had sought apology to aggrieved parties for the misdeeds of their earlier rulers; they have not lost anything at all for their gesture.
New Delhi has no moral ground to justify the repressive acts of Hasina in the past one and a half decades. Indian authorities cannot deny that some Bangladeshi victims of enforced disappearance had been discovered in India.
The stories of enforced disappearance, mass murder and extra-judicial killing, and torture have been documented in the reports of the United Nations and human rights organisations. The world had seen what kind of national elections the Hasina regime had held in Bangladesh in 2014, 2018 and 2024.
As written in the book by former Indian president Pranab Mukherjee and reported during the Bangladesh tour of the then Indian external affairs secretary Sujatha Singh days before the 2014 elections, India’s naked interference into the domestic politics including electoral affairs of Bangladesh in favour of Hasina had hurt and humiliated political elements and conscious people in this country.
The moment Hasina’s repressive rule came to an end, India’s reaction to the political changeover in Dhaka was different from those of other countries of the civilized world. Later on, the attitude of Delhi and a major section of the Indian media towards the Yunus government seemed to be attacking and demeaning when the rest of the world shows high level of respect to the Nobel Peace Price winner ruler of Bangladesh.
Unfortunately, even during the Hasina rule – the honeymoon period of Delhi’s desired relations with Dhaka – India had not extended her support to Bangladesh – neither on the ground during the Rohingya influx into Cox’s Bazar, nor during the vote at the United Nations.
In that case, some people may draw conclusion that India does not consider Bangladesh as a friendly neighbour, unless it remains subservient to Delhi. And in accordance with Kautilya’s formula, if my enemy’s enemy is my friend, what does Iran’s status as the enemy of India’s close ally Israel stand or America’s as the enemy of Russia as a friend of India? Or, Turkey as friend of archenemy Pakistan or Bangladesh when it is a friend of China?
Both success and negative effects of ill move like human trafficking in the pursuit of foreign affairs policy are well known to India’s diplomatic and strategic analysts. That is also not unknown to the friendly countries, who are further aware of India’s relations with her South Asian neighbours.
By pushing her minority Muslim citizens in to Bangladesh, India not only sets before the global community the instance of minority repression, Delhi has also confirmed that the formation of Pakistan for the Muslim population in 1947 and Bangladesh later on – which was described by proponents of a greater post-colonial India – was justified.
When Bangladesh is heading for a truly free and fair elections, institutionalisation of democracy, completion of reforms to rebuild state institutions broken during the fascist rule, concluding the trial of the culprits of major crimes such as massacre, extrajudicial killing, enforced disappearance, detention, repression, corruption, extortion, and money laundering and efforts are on to turn Bangladesh into a dignified country at the glonal stage, India has distanced herself from constructive engagement and dialogue with Bangladesh.
Despite certain pressure of public opinion and a pledge made by the interim administration to make public some of the presumably unequal treaties and agreements contrary to Bangladesh’s national interests, Dhaka has so far refrained from revealing them, perhaps to prevent further deterioration in bilateral relations.
Diplomacy demands reciprocity and it is not just any secret affair or something that is described as half-truth; if Delhi gives an idea in a loud and clear manner to Dhaka of what kind of relationship it wants to build and maintain in the coming days, the new era of bilateral relations may begin immediately.
* Khawaza Main Uddin is a journalist.
Khawaza Main UddinDhaka
Published: 17 Jun 2025, 15: 27
Indian border forces BSF wanted to push in 14 persons over the Roumari border at Kurigram. Border Guard of Bangladesh (BGB) thwarted them. 17 May, Boraibari border Collected
No matter what history says, today’s India is forcing a section of its own population to enter into another country through land border illegally, due only to their religious belief and identity.
Muslim men and women from the neighbouring country are being pushed in to no other land than Bangladesh, where more than a million Rohingya Muslim people evicted from another neighbour, Myanmar, have been given shelter.Thus, India’s internal issue is turning into a cross-border dispute apart from the treatment of the Muslims as hostage in its domestic politics.
It cannot be believed that such a move by India’s central government of Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) ahead of the crucial elections in states of West Bengal and Assam that have significant percentage of Muslim voters, is appreciated by democratic, progressive and conscientious people there?
In this phase, Delhi has taken the move to send some Indian Muslims to Bangladesh territory – it all is happening after the political changeover through the July 2024 revolution. There is no reason that the Bangladesh people will not understand that such a move conforms to Delhi’s hostile policy towards Dhaka.
New Delhi has first imposed visa restrictions for the Bangladesh people and at one stage cancelled the transshipment facility through India for Bangladesh businesses.
The Indian godi media (pro-ruling party propaganda) has also launched a campaign to spread rumours and cynicism terming as terrorist or militant activities a successful student-mass revolution that has overthrown a ruler who killed democracy. Earlier, Sheikh Hasina who fled Bangladesh in the face of popular demonstrations, was given shelter in nowhere but Delhi, without showing any sensitivity to the sentiment and emotion of the people of Bangladesh.
In such circumstances, is there any likelihood that the most critical bilateral issues such as sharing of waters of transboundary rivers, border killing, trade imbalance, and smuggling and drug trafficking will remain completely out of sight of Bangladesh?
There is no reason to believe either that the pundits outside of India and Bangladesh, or even the global citizens having a minimum level of common senses, would not be able to read mindset of the Delhiwalas and understand the objectives of their activities.
India now wants to say the people who were being pushed in are actually nationals of Bangladesh and even if many of them have been living in India for many years, they are legally not citizens of India. On making its own citizens stateless, foreign media including the BBC have run reports naming and quoting individual victims and confirmed that the Muslims who were pushed in to Bangladesh are in fact Indian nationals.
If a few of them are found to be Bangladeshi nationals travelling to India, they could have been deported lawfully with due respect. But. Dhaka has no legal obligation to accept the Indian citizens as Bangladeshis only because they are Muslims. Is Indian premier Narendra Modi’s friend Donald Trump welcoming illegal Indian immigrants to the US?
By using its minority population as pawn of chess in domestic and external policies, India as a state and civilization proves its bankruptcy and its leaders and policymakers are doing so, as part of a conscious policy decision.
The attitude of Delhi and a major section of the Indian media towards the Yunus government seemed to be attacking and demeaning when the rest of the world shows high level of respect to the Nobel Peace Price winner.
It seems that Delhi is nowhere near self-realisation about correctness of the action to push Bangladesh towards an unwanted situation, let alone making self-criticism. Rather, India’s standpoint, as well as tactics vis-à-vis Bangladesh such as maintaining hardly any communications with Professor Y8unus-led government at the state level, exposes certain anger, which has originated from the fall of a subservient ruler.
There is no logical ground for India’s anger against the Bangladesh people, instead of the possibility of the opposite. Sheikh Hasina with Delhi’s overt and covert patronisation for more than one and a half decades, had deprived the people of this country of their democratic and human rights; furthermore, the Indian authorities had made all attempts to glorify the one who was a fascist ruler.
One cannot ignore the fact that the aggrieved Bangladeshis had begun ‘boycott Indian goods’ movement immediately after the 2024 parliamentary polls Hasina won with Indian blessings, months before the demonstrations that ousted the iron lady. In such a context, Delhi’s anger against the Bangladesh people can be equated with that of an angry loser. Delhi should have rather had more anger against nuclear Pakistan and a more powerful China, the two neighbouring countries with which India had engangled into border clashes recently.
Showing flexibility to powerful countries and aggression to non-nuclear neighbour is the reflection of Chanakya Kautilya’s policy of Matsanaya according to which big fishes eat up small ones.
The rulers of Delhi have been obsessed with old policy of pre-Christ era, at a time when they should have extended olive branch to the people of Bangladesh so that there is a thaw in the deadlock in bilateral relations.
Japan, Germany and South Africa had sought apology to aggrieved parties for the misdeeds of their earlier rulers; they have not lost anything at all for their gesture.
New Delhi has no moral ground to justify the repressive acts of Hasina in the past one and a half decades. Indian authorities cannot deny that some Bangladeshi victims of enforced disappearance had been discovered in India.
The stories of enforced disappearance, mass murder and extra-judicial killing, and torture have been documented in the reports of the United Nations and human rights organisations. The world had seen what kind of national elections the Hasina regime had held in Bangladesh in 2014, 2018 and 2024.
As written in the book by former Indian president Pranab Mukherjee and reported during the Bangladesh tour of the then Indian external affairs secretary Sujatha Singh days before the 2014 elections, India’s naked interference into the domestic politics including electoral affairs of Bangladesh in favour of Hasina had hurt and humiliated political elements and conscious people in this country.
The moment Hasina’s repressive rule came to an end, India’s reaction to the political changeover in Dhaka was different from those of other countries of the civilized world. Later on, the attitude of Delhi and a major section of the Indian media towards the Yunus government seemed to be attacking and demeaning when the rest of the world shows high level of respect to the Nobel Peace Price winner ruler of Bangladesh.
Unfortunately, even during the Hasina rule – the honeymoon period of Delhi’s desired relations with Dhaka – India had not extended her support to Bangladesh – neither on the ground during the Rohingya influx into Cox’s Bazar, nor during the vote at the United Nations.
In that case, some people may draw conclusion that India does not consider Bangladesh as a friendly neighbour, unless it remains subservient to Delhi. And in accordance with Kautilya’s formula, if my enemy’s enemy is my friend, what does Iran’s status as the enemy of India’s close ally Israel stand or America’s as the enemy of Russia as a friend of India? Or, Turkey as friend of archenemy Pakistan or Bangladesh when it is a friend of China?
Both success and negative effects of ill move like human trafficking in the pursuit of foreign affairs policy are well known to India’s diplomatic and strategic analysts. That is also not unknown to the friendly countries, who are further aware of India’s relations with her South Asian neighbours.
By pushing her minority Muslim citizens in to Bangladesh, India not only sets before the global community the instance of minority repression, Delhi has also confirmed that the formation of Pakistan for the Muslim population in 1947 and Bangladesh later on – which was described by proponents of a greater post-colonial India – was justified.
When Bangladesh is heading for a truly free and fair elections, institutionalisation of democracy, completion of reforms to rebuild state institutions broken during the fascist rule, concluding the trial of the culprits of major crimes such as massacre, extrajudicial killing, enforced disappearance, detention, repression, corruption, extortion, and money laundering and efforts are on to turn Bangladesh into a dignified country at the glonal stage, India has distanced herself from constructive engagement and dialogue with Bangladesh.
Despite certain pressure of public opinion and a pledge made by the interim administration to make public some of the presumably unequal treaties and agreements contrary to Bangladesh’s national interests, Dhaka has so far refrained from revealing them, perhaps to prevent further deterioration in bilateral relations.
Diplomacy demands reciprocity and it is not just any secret affair or something that is described as half-truth; if Delhi gives an idea in a loud and clear manner to Dhaka of what kind of relationship it wants to build and maintain in the coming days, the new era of bilateral relations may begin immediately.
* Khawaza Main Uddin is a journalist.
