Indian Diplomacy and the focused Army General

Published in The Dhaka Courier, May 15, 2009

The recent news of the Indian High Commissioner's meeting with the Leader of the Opposition Begum Khaleda Zia was unexpected coming after the Indian Foreign Minister and the Indian Foreign Secretary had visited Dhaka and ignored the former Prime Minister that left many raised eyebrows with a lot of unhealthy speculations and criticisms to boot.

India's democratic credentials are universally acknowledged. Most of us have heard about the famous exchange the legendary Jawaherlal Nehru had with his three defense chiefs who had called on him soon after India's independence in 1947. He kept them waiting a long while, knowing their intention was to advise him on Pakistan, and when they faced him, he simply asked them to leave their uniforms if they wished to "advise" a Prime Minister on political affairs.

Therefore, when the Indian Foreign Minister came to Bangladesh and found time to meet our Army Chief but none to call upon the Leader of the Opposition, there were a lot of expected criticisms. The reason given by the Indian side that Pranab Mukherjee could not meet Khaleda Zia for lack of time was a poor one, given that he found time to visit Dhaka University, in addition to meeting General Moeen.

The meeting of the Indian Foreign Secretary Shivsankar Menon with the Army Chief was also equally surprising because it is unusual for someone in his position to call on someone like General Moeen while on an official visit. Since he followed his boss to meet the Bangladesh Army Chief, it may not be unfair to either to suspect that they both had something secret to discuss with him that forced them to break with practice and protocol. It would be interesting to find out whether an Indian Foreign Minister or a Foreign Secretary, while visiting another country, has met someone like General Moeen, especially as in case of Pranab Mukherjee, where he skipped meeting the Leader of the Opposition.

For good reasons, Indian diplomacy as Indian democracy is based on solid credentials. Indian Foreign Service has some of the finest diplomats. Therefore, for justifiable reasons, the meetings of Pranab Mukherjee and Menon with General Moeen have raised many questions in Bangladesh. A lot of this has also come out of the controversial role the General has played during the post 1/11 emergency rule when he tried to impose upon Bangladesh his "vision" of democracy that did not have any place for either Sheikh Hasina or Khaleda Zia. He summarily assumed politicians to be corrupt and got a large number of them incarcerated. Then he changed course and under his encouragement, the civilians in the emergency government negotiated an agreement for the 29th December elections that BNP thought favoured the Awami League.
During the emergency, the General also visited India and met senior leaders of the Congress-led Government. Before undertaking the trip, he said that he was going to put the Bangladesh-India relations on track, something political governments had failed to do, and would even meet the Indian Prime Minister that did not eventually happen. He, of course, met the Indian FM on this trip.

These facts about the General are known to the Indians. Yet the Indian Foreign Ministry arranged the meetings that have naturally caused suspicion in Bangladesh about what transpired in the meetings. There were reports in the Indian media that Shivsankar Menon came to warn Sheikh Hasina about a plot to assassinate her that was picked up on the internet chat sessions! Like the reason given for the Indian FM's failure to meet Khaleda Zia, this explanation is also a very wishy washy one that no one in Bangladesh has taken seriously.

Geopolitics and political realities leave Bangladesh and India with no alternative but to be good neighbours if they want the welfare of their peoples and their countries. Bangladesh, an agricultural nation where rivers sustain life and livelihood of its people, has 54 of the 56 rivers flowing from India. Our position is between the mainland India and seven Indian provinces in the Northeast whose economic development can only be fully achieved with Bangladesh's cooperation. Further, at times when terrorism is a major concern in India, it is essential for Bangladesh with its 150 million people to succeed and move forward as a state. If we fail, India cannot avoid the consequences as Bangladesh then can very well turn into a hotbed of international terrorism.

Few things have happened in Bangladesh recently that suggests we have crossed a bend to align our relations with India in a win-win perspective. Parties and informed groups are now openly talking on issues such as land transit/connectivity and giving India use of our ports that were taboo subjects in our politics not too long ago. The emergence of the AL with a massive mandate that has historically good relations with the Indians, particularly the ruling Congress, is another positive development for realigning Bangladesh-India relations on the basis of mutuality.

It is, therefore, surprising that Indian diplomacy should be making moves that are bound to cause legitimate concerns in Bangladesh. There are other causes for worry coming from the Indian side. In his meeting with Sheikh Hasina, Menon extended to our Prime Minister an invitation on behalf of the Indian Government to send a delegation to look at Tipai Mukh barrage, little concerned that this is an explosive issue for damaging relations, as dangerous as the Farakka issue. Already opinion inside Bangladesh is crystallizing dangerously against this barrage which people feel that just as the Farakka barrage will eventually turn northwest Bangladesh into a desert; this barrage will do the same to northeast Bangladesh after it is commissioned in 2012.

For achieving good and sustainable relations, India must change her mindset from bilateralism and seek regional and sub-regional resolution of the problems that have stood in the way of good relations between our two countries. The sharing of the issue of water of the common rivers, which is a major cause of ill feelings between our two countries, can easily be turned into a bondage for sustainable friendship given the undeniable fact that sub-regional approach to this issue could leave both India and Bangladesh together with Nepal and Bhutan with not only just enough water in the dry season but also enough electricity to share and devastating floods to contain.

Indian diplomacy in Bangladesh is perhaps focusing the wrong areas and thereby overlooking a momentous opportunity, one that may not come again in foreseeable future, when Bangladesh is really eager to improve its relations with India. Overtures to Bangladesh's armed forces together with building of barrages like Tipai Mukh (not forgetting fencing the border) are some of the recent Indian steps in opposite directions. Such overtures from Dhaka's point of view could throw Bangladesh-India relations into a new abyss out of which fundamentalism and terrorism could grow dangerously. A successful and stable Bangladesh is to India's advantage; while an unstable Bangladesh with attempts to project it as a 'failed state' is dangerous for India also. It is still a mystery why Indian diplomacy is moving in a wrong way to ensure the latter.

Indian High Commissioner's meeting with Khaleda Zia may be a move to manage relations from sliding, although India must do a lot more to re-assure Bangladesh. The Indians need Khaleda Zia on board for improvement of relations. They also need to talk to Sheikh Hasina to encourage her to resolve conflicts in Bangladesh's politics and not create any. Indian diplomacy is on test again not just for Bangladesh's sake but for India's as well.