Manifestos and Foreign Policy

Published in The Daily Star, Sunday, December 28, 2008

A study of the election manifestos of the two mainstream parties on foreign policy is not encouraging. Foreign policy figures separately in both documents, but not foreign policy issues. AL's manifesto says that Bangladesh's foreign policy goal is "friendship with all and malice towards none." It also speaks of developing friendly relations with all countries.

The BNP manifesto, too, speaks of developing friendly relations with all countries, but has avoided mentioning India by name. Both documents speak of multilateral diplomacy and economic diplomacy, and their importance to Bangladesh, including the importance of Saarc and Bimstec. Both documents have lauded Bangladesh's peacekeeping role. The AL has carried this subject under Defense Policy; the BNP under Foreign Policy.

The BNP document takes note of the concern of the international community about terrorism and militancy and the need to contain them, but not in the part on foreign policy .The AL takes care of militancy and terrorism in one line by supporting the formation of a South Asian Task Force in the part that deals with foreign policy. In both manifestos, the need for manpower export, the interests of Bangladeshi expatriates, and enhancing foreign remittance and foreign direct investment have been mentioned. But these issues have been mentioned in an incoherent manner in different sections of the documents and not as part of foreign policy.

By not bringing foreign policy issues under one head, both manifestos have failed to focus on fundamental changes that have occurred in recent times in the way nations conduct relations. Globalisation and the role of non-state actors in international relations have broken down the two key elements of the Westphalian concept of sovereignty that had formed the basis of foreign policy in the past, namely territoriality and exclusion of external actors from domestic authority structures. As a consequence, today, foreign policy formulation and execution have become extremely difficult and more complex.

Issues such as global warming, rise of militancy, terrorism by state and non-state actors, and most recently the economic meltdown in US and its impact worldwide, have brought in additional challenges that are shaping foreign policies everywhere. These challenges have made it critical for governments to deal with foreign policy with great care, and have also made their foreign ministries the key ministry.

Just mentioning that Bangladesh's foreign policy goal is one for friendship and against malice, and to use this principle to develop bilateral relations with all countries is not a serious way of handling such an important subject as foreign policy. Both documents have treated foreign policy the same way as they have done in past elections, thus failing to realise that foreign policy today is a matter of survival as well as a great opportunity for development.

An election manifesto is really not the right document to reflect on all of the above. In such a document, parties concentrate on those issues that give them the maximum benefit in getting votes. Foreign policy does not normally figure as a major issue in elections in most developing countries, but to suggest that it is not an issue of serious concern to Bangladeshi voters may not be wholly correct.

Bangladeshis take an active interest in what happens abroad. The six million compatriots who live abroad make them take a more than usual interest in foreign policy. For example, the stand the party's take on India is a major concern of voters. It is not by oversight that the BNP did not mention India by name in their manifesto, because it is intended to indicate their attitude towards India to the voters .

Bangladesh's future depends largely on expanding external trade, increasing foreign remittance and foreign direct investment, manpower export, etc. -- all issues of foreign policy although in their election manifestos neither party has acknowledged these as such. Bangladesh could become a successful nation or a failed one, depending on how she handles these crucial foreign policy goals.

The success or failure in attaining these goals depends on the support and understanding of the international community, particularly of the development partners, which will depend on how Bangladesh manages her domestic politics and controls Islamic fundamentalism and militancy.

Both manifestos have failed to acknowledge that Bangladesh must re-establish its image as a predominantly Muslim state with liberal traditions, which had taken a serious battering before 1/11 as a result of failure of politics.

For some unknown reason, foreign policy in Bangladesh has not been given the importance that it deserves to serve the country's interests better in a complex and increasingly globalised world. The two manifestos treat foreign affairs as a subject peripheral to governance. Even this caretaker government has treated foreign policy in the same fashion.

At a time when the opinions of Great Britain and Belgium will be very crucial in the world's assessment of the elections, this government has recalled our high commissioner/ambassador in these stations as they will be retiring. If the government had viewed foreign policy seriously, it would have given these two career diplomats extension so that they could remain in their important stations to signal that Bangladesh is capable of handling foreign policy professionally.

It may not be unfair to mention that newspaper analysing the two manifestos had no need to comment on what either said on foreign policy, which is indeed a sad commentary on the importance the AL and the BNP have given to it.