Border haats need to reopen. But not the way they used to
Traditionally, the people belonging to border belts are deprived of modern facilities. According to a 2018 World Bank report, the border haats led to a reduction in informal and illegal trading and generated a peace dividend
Since the fall of the Sheikh Hasina government in August last year, the once-bustling border haats between Bangladesh and India have fallen silent.
Trade has reached a standstill at all seven haats operating along the border since 2010, and construction on three new haats has also been indefinitely halted.
Border haats were established to facilitate small-scale, duty-free trade between communities on both sides of the border. These marketplaces allowed designated traders to sell locally produced goods, with transactions conducted in local currency or through barter.
Thus, they ensured direct economic benefits for border communities.
Keep updated, follow The Business Standard's Google news channel
However, operations have now been suspended, so this decade-old initiative faces an uncertain future, leaving traders and local communities in limbo.
It goes without saying that reopening the border haats is essential to realising their original vision. But merely resuming operations won't be enough—significant reforms are needed to ensure a level playing field, where Bangladeshi businesses have an equal stake rather than the haats being dominated by Indian traders.
By providing a legal means of income, border haats could significantly reduce the likelihood of people turning to illegal trade—and, in turn, lower the risk of them being killed in the process [at the border as many of those killed by the BSF are people attempting to cross the border illegally for trade]
Another pressing concern is the increasing presence of large-scale commerce. National brands infiltrated these markets, shifting the focus from local exchanges to wholesale transactions—an unintended consequence that undermines the haats' original goal of promoting indigenous trade.
But first, we have to understand the true importance and potential of the border haats, which tells us a lot about the need to reopen them.
According to a 2018 World Bank report titled 'A Glass Half Full: The Promise of Regional Trade in South Asia,' the border haats led to a reduction in informal and illegal trading and generated a peace dividend.
The total trade at each haat, as estimated by the state governments, was at $600,000 annually, the WB report also said.
Md Mazadul Hoque, an economic analyst and author of 'Microeconomic Issues: Bangladesh Perspective,' highlighted the transformative impact of these haats on local communities.
"Traditionally, the people belonging to border belts are deprived of modern facilities. The border haats genuinely improved their lifestyle along with livelihoods. The women of the localities, in particular, were the biggest beneficiaries, as they were broadly linked with selling and buying local produce."
Haque described that once, there had been a great deal of informal trade between India-Bangladesh through the porous borders. Naturally, illegal trade practitioners did not abide by the international trading terms set by the two countries.
"But the border haats brought transparency in the affairs related to border belts. They promoted people-to-people connections apart from building up trust between the two countries' citizens," he said.
Most importantly, he noted that border haats could help reduce border killings, as many of those killed by the BSF are people attempting to cross the border illegally for trade.
"But by providing a legal means of income, border haats could significantly reduce the likelihood of people turning to illegal trade—and, in turn, lower the risk of them being killed in the process," he explained.
Meanwhile, Nikita Singla, a non-resident scholar at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, also explained the importance of border haats, saying that they were "conceived as a confidence-building measure to strengthen relations between the two nations."
"In remote border areas on both sides, this government-led initiative transformed cross-border dynamics, shifting the focus from conflict to economic cooperation," she added.
So, according to her, a sudden halt to these haats has profoundly affected the lives of border communities.
"The long-term economic stability of South Asia relies on ongoing confidence-building measures. These are important for building trust, showing goodwill, integrating local communities into economic cooperation and growth, and, most importantly, preventing conflicts. That's why initiatives like border haats must continue and be protected from political changes," she said.
That said, the way border haats were operated in the past was far from ideal, consistently putting Bangladeshi traders at a severe disadvantage compared to their Indian counterparts.
For instance, at the Dolura border haat in Jahangirnagar Union of Sunamganj Sadar Upazila, the Bangladeshi side used to open at 11 am, while the Indian gate remained closed until 1 pm. This delay resulted in fewer Indian buyers and lower sales.
Additionally, the BSF imposed strict regulations on Indian buyers visiting the haat.
On average, Bangladeshi traders sold goods worth around Tk10 lakh per haat, whereas Indian traders sold nearly three times as much.
Dr Imtiaz A Hussain, a professor of Global Studies and Governance at Independent University, Bangladesh (IUB), also described how the original intent of the haats was increasingly being overshadowed by large-scale commerce.
He noted that border haats were meant to enhance interaction and transactions over "locally" produced items between indigenous groups split across the Bangladesh-India border.
"The Bangladesh-India Border Haat agreement of 2013 was hijacked by 'national' brands permeating into these haats, particularly plastic-based items going to India, and more strict Indian Border Security Forces than the relaxed approach of the Bangladesh Border Guards," he said.
Therefore, Dr Hussain believes that even if the July 2024 Movement had not disrupted those transactions, they were headed for a collision of sorts anyway.
"Those haats were becoming more like Kawran Bazar or New Market stalls. Indian products were brought in and given, without unloading, to buyers who had lined up to receive them. No transactions in the haats at all. Bangladeshi sellers had to sit and patiently await buyers from the Indian side, which numbered far fewer than Bangladeshi buyers, or just window-shoppers or onlookers," he said.
In other words, before his eyes, "retail" was being replaced by "wholesale" exchanges. Since the haat communities were so distant from even small towns, these wholesalers were coming from further inside Bangladesh than the border indigenous groups being targeted by the agreement.
Meanwhile, the agreement, rather than preserving indigenous market practices, was inadvertently facilitating their transformation into routine national and global market transactions. As a result, a crucial part of the heritage was being lost.
Dr Hussain further described that even though there was a limit as to how much each individual could take into the haat, by networking, a lot more money could be brought to bear on each transaction.
"Of course, given the scorching sun blazing upon these open-aired haats, one of the biggest winners (and not even mentioned in the agreement) would be tea stalls and refreshment corners. We also noted how barbed-wire boundaries were as easily ignored by community folks as selling or pilfering products, making all the stipulated regulations somewhat meaningless," he also noted.
Nonetheless, Dr Hussain cautioned that if the haats remain closed for too long, smuggling could once again become the primary alternative for cross-border transactions.
So, he prescribed that "if in the interim the said loose ends can be tightened up, the border haats would be one of the most meaningful evidences that indigenous groups and heritage matter at a time when becoming 'globalised' has become top fashion in everything and to everyone."
