How Bangladesh's 'internal' matter became India's own affair

What was initially dubbed by New Delhi as Bangladesh's "internal" matter has now turned into India's own affair and a big challenge.

When scores of people, mostly young ones, were being brutally killed during the third week of July this year, India described it as an "internal" matter of Bangladesh.

"As you are aware, there are ongoing protests in Bangladesh. We see this as an internal matter of the country," India's external affairs ministry spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal said at a briefing on 19 July.

At least 66 people were killed on that same day and the death toll had already surpassed 100 since 16 July.

China and Russia also chose not to speak out elaborately on the matter.

The Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson Lin Jian told a briefing on 30 July China had noted that the situation in Bangladesh has come under control and social order has resumed, adding they were heartened by that as Bangladesh's friend and close neighbour.

"China and Bangladesh are comprehensive strategic cooperative partners. China stands ready to work with Bangladesh to deliver on the important common understandings reached by the leaders of the two countries during Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina's visit to China (in July), deepen the comprehensive strategic cooperative partnership between the two countries, and deliver more benefits to the two peoples," he said.

A day after Sheikh Hasina resigned, Russia called it an "internal" matter of Bangladesh.

However, prior to 2024 elections, Russian foreign ministry spokesperson Maria Zakharova on 15 November 2023 said in a statement, "Key industries may come under attack, as well as a number of officials who will be accused without evidence of obstructing the democratic will of citizens in the upcoming parliamentary elections on 7 January 2024.

"If the results of the people's will are not satisfactory to the US, attempts to further destabilise the situation in Bangladesh along the lines of the 'Arab Spring' are likely," she added.

Bangladesh's then foreign minister AK Abdul Momen dismissed the possibility of an 'Arab Spring' and the US did not comment.

But the US did, on a number of occasions during the protests, remind the Hasina regime of people's right to peaceful gathering, criticised internet blackouts, and asked all to show restraint.

It is not surprising that global players will have a say on a country which was born at the cost of three million people, but with respective roles from the world powers, three of them members of United Nations Security Council (UNSC).

They were players either in favour or against the birth of Bangladesh. It was the Cold War era at the time.

The US and the then Soviet Union (now majority Russia) as well as India and China were important players who either sided with Bangladesh for its freedom or supported the occupying Pakistani forces.

We know India, alongside sheltering 10 million Bangladeshis and providing training and arms for freedom fighters, led from the front in the international arena for Bangladesh's independence. The Soviet Union played an important role in the UNSC.

The US and China, both permanent members of the UNSC, were opposed to Bangladesh's independence. 

It has been more than three decades since the end of the Cold War era. But the same country, Bangladesh, has had to witness the important global players' role in different capacities during the recent people's uprising against a regime that is the successor of the freedom struggle and leader of the 1971 war of independence.

The irony is that the Awami League, which had liberated a nation with the people's power, did not try to understand the power of commoners. They went to state power with a huge mandate in 2009, but stood against people's voting rights and finally failed to understand what people's power could do.

The uprising compelled Sheikh Hasina to resign and take shelter in India. And as soon as she flew to India, Bangladesh's developments no longer remained only Bangladesh's "internal" matter to them.

Indian ministers and MPs, irrespective of position, as well as Indian intelligentsia and media welcomed the decision of sheltering Sheikh Hasina, stating that a trusted friend should never be abandoned in the time of need.

But, Bangladesh now wants her extradition.

Many of the people who wanted Sheikh Hasina's ouster believe India was one major external power to keep her in power without legitimacy for all these years.

Indian external affair secretary Sujata Sing's whirlwind Dhaka visit ahead of the 2014 elections is one point for them.

Another point is New Delhi's persuasion for the regime when the US was pressing for a free, fair and participatory voting before the 2024 elections.

There are more allegations — both true and false — that India needs to address.

India's intelligentsia and media are also suggesting a new horizon in relations between both countries.

Remember that Chief Advisor Dr Muhammad Yunus in his first address to the nation did not echo the old rhetoric "friendship to all, malice towards none" foreign policy.

"We will maintain friendly relations with all nations. Our foreign policy will be based on mutual trust, confidence and cooperation," said Dr Yunus.

The words trust, confidence and cooperation are very important to follow developments on matters relating to Bangladesh and India in the months to come, even years.