Loading Now

India should ensure Bangladesh protects Hindus – Firstpost

India should ensure Bangladesh protects Hindus – Firstpost



Is it only with India that its smaller neighbours tend to punch way above their weight when it comes to dealing with, as they call it, the ‘big brother’? Or is it the case that Indian polity has allowed them to become brazen enough to roughshod India’s interests and still come out with pronouncements that seem like a threat, mixed with aggression? What is it that holds India back? Is it the lack of political will? Or is it the existing world geopolitics? And, if things continue the way they have in Bangladesh, especially since August 2024 (following the ouster of Sheikh Hasina as the prime minister in what effectively looked like a coup sans military involvement), then Bangladesh is surely playing a dangerous game.

On the one hand, Bangladesh is set to receive 50,000 tonnes of rice from India. On the other hand, it has snuggled up to Pakistan, India’s arch-enemy—not to forget the fact that it was from the tyranny of Pakistan that Bangladesh was liberated in 1971 with the full support of India. And yet, it is formally seeking extradition of Sheikh Hasina, who has been in India ever since her ouster.

Had it been any other nation with a typical blow-hot, blow-cold relationship with India, like, say, the Maldives, it should not have caused much consternation among the common public. After the initial “India Out” call given by Maldives president Mohammed Muizzu early this year, some tactical manoeuvring and a one-man campaign for Lakshadweep tourism by Prime Minister Narendra Modi sorted out the issue, and Muizzu was back in India seeking to reboot ties and even claiming that he never followed the “India Out” policy.

However, with Bangladesh, things change. There are more than one reasons for this. But primarily, the reason is that there is a sizable Hindu minority (despite lessening of its numbers since 1951 by up to 15 per cent) within Bangladesh, which is, quite literally, at the mercy of the hardline Islamic fundamentalist elements and leadership in the neighbouring country. To make matters worse, this fundamentalist grouping is hiding behind an unelected government, with a Nobel laureate, Muhammad Yunus, becoming the so-called ‘soft face’.

There is enough evidence to suggest that he is not in control—irrespective of the kind of placebo statements he seeks to make. In fact, sometimes, he becomes hawkish—like when he said that the killings and targeting of Hindus in Bangladesh were ‘not a communal issue’, after India strongly reminded him of the same—and, on other occasions, he seeks to portray a ‘soft and inclusive image’, when he visited Dhakeshwari Temple in what seemed like a photo op, trying to give assurance that the Hindus would be safe under his regime.

However, beyond the optics and the questions surrounding them, some hard aspects are as follows:

  • The Islamic fundamentalist grouping knows that there is still a sizeable number of Hindus, though woefully less in terms of share of population, within their territory. They can be held hostage as soft targets; in case there is a strong action from India. This is not to say that the Hindus are not in danger presently or are not being persecuted. But, like it happens in cases of kidnapping, there is always a threat of worse things happening to the victim if too much pressure is put on the perpetrators. The kind of games played with former monk of ISKCON, Charu Charan Das, was a case in point.

  • The Islamic fundamentalist grouping also knows that there is a sizeable number of their sympathisers within the boundaries of India, particularly in West Bengal and, generally, in many places (and pockets) within India. While Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee has sought to make neutral comments regarding the issue, it is a moot point as to whether she would be able to rein in such elements if push comes to shove in her border state. Thus, in the event of a strong action from India, they can and will activate their ‘sleeper cells’ within India.

  • This fundamentalist grouping is further supported by the backstage global players, whom we can call the Deep State, as was evident by Yunus’ visit to the US, where he virtually gave away the game of the so-called “students’ movement in Bangladesh”. Moreover, a sizable section of the world media and think tanks were celebrating the anointment of Yunus as something that would herald a new era of ‘reforms’ in Bangladesh, following the ouster of Sheikh Hasina. The moot point never asked was: How can an interim government pave the way for ‘political reforms’ when it is not even elected?

  • There is another threat within Bangladesh, which can create further problems: The longer the interim government stays in power, the greater the threat of the Bangladesh military—whatever its strength—taking over. Both Pakistan and Bangladesh have had a history of military takeovers since their independence/creation.

  • While, theoretically, there is a threat to India’s chicken neck, when fundamentalist groups can try to cut the North-East off from the rest of India at the narrow corridor just north of Bangladesh, and running adjacent to West Bengal, it can be assumed that the Indian authorities would have taken all the necessary steps to secure the same. It has been a long time since Sharjeel Imam’s views on this were heard by all of India.

  • Further, whether Pakistan can actually be of some help—apart from atmospherics—is a moot point. Pakistan is already battling its own economic demons, besides Afghanistan emerging as its new frontier.

The above aspects are crucial to keep in mind when we think about the response of the government of India, vis-à-vis Bangladesh.

Understandably, Hindus are now fairly convinced that nothing short of a direct intervention would be able to stem the tide unleashed against the Hindus living in Bangladesh. In part—but justifiably so—this is an emotional response. For a country that has taken pride in saving people from various other countries and safely evacuating them in times of conflict across the world in the last decade or so, it is indeed quite painful to know that we have not been able to save Hindu brothers in our neighbourhood.

Could India deploy a slew of measures that can pull the strings the right way in Bangladesh, to the advantage of the Hindus living there? These measures could be diplomatic, using the world bodies to put pressure to ensure that Bangladesh does not get the leeway of support from the non-state backstage players, etc. Further, Bangladesh depends a lot on India for its sheer survival.

In the wake of the same, is it not a travesty of sorts that Bharat is supplying rice at a crucial time to Bangladesh—to the tune of 50,000 tonnes? What does Bharat have to worry about? As it is, things are not good for the Hindus living in that country; a large number want to come to India. Whether this is feasible or not can be a moot point.

However, India can surely prevail upon Bangladesh to ensure the stoppage of harassment and persecution of Hindus as a precondition for supplying rice to Bangladesh that is crucial for its survival. At this point, it does not generate much confidence when the Indian High Commissioner in Bangladesh is quoted as having said, “This is how we look at the relationship. We have so many things to offer each other with our growing capabilities and rising ambitions to grow and develop.”

That we believe in a “democratic, stable, peaceful, progressive, and inclusive” Bangladesh is a great thing to say. However, with no evident overtures of a similar nature being received from the other side, it appears that India should have used ‘rice diplomacy’ to make Bangladesh tune in to what India wants—and not what the small neighbour, owing its very creation and existence to us, says and does what it wants.

It is clear that Bangladesh is playing a dangerous game, which is being controlled by non-state Islamic fundamentalist actors, with no accountability to its people. It is high time India took a call on putting its foot down and getting done what is required to save the Hindus in Bangladesh.

Writer is Director, Centre for Policy Research and Advocacy, a Division of Sarayu Trust. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect Firstpost’s views.



Source link

Post Comment