How former Indian diplomats and experts see the Bangladesh situation

Given the unfolding evenings in Bangladesh, India has nothing to do at the moment but to wait and watch, former diplomats and analysts of the country have opined. They feel that the situation in Bangladesh is still murky, complicated and volatile. The future is uncertain. Alongside adopting a “wait and watch” stance, effort must also be made to ensure the safety of the Indian nationals living in Bangladesh. India is keeping an eye on that too.

Indian diplomats and analysts are also concerned about the security of the minorities in Bangladesh. In a statement issued on Tuesday, the Indian external affairs minister S Jaishankar expressed concern in this regard too. Indian observers note that in these times of lawlessness and chaos, the student community, the Jamaat ameer and BNP leaders have condemned the attack on the minorities. This is a good omen, to the observers.

Speaking to Prothom Alo, former Indian diplomat who had served in Bangladesh, Deb Mukherjee, said, “I think India could not imagine the situation would escalate in such a manner. Here is nothing to do at the moment but to wait.” He said, “There are all sorts of people involved in the movement. It is now known how they will proceed. It would not be wise at all to come forward at the moment. It must be acknowledged that these are new circumstances in Bangladesh.”

While another former high commissioner Pinak Ranjan Chakrabarty is also of the opinion that India must follow a wait and watch policy, he feels that India has the capacity to handle the situation.

Speaking to Prothom Alo on Tuesday, he said, “When I was in that country (Bangladesh) in 2007, the situation was similarly complex. That was during the 1/11 time. India handled the situation. India tackled similar situation in Nepal and Sri Lanka too. So while this situation was unexpected, I refuse to see this as a disaster from the Indian side.”

Pinak Ranjan was surprised at the handling of the situation. He is still wondering how the government made such wrong decisions, did not grasp the situation on ground, did not understand that the people had completely gone against them. His first surprise was the use of the word “razakar”. The second matter that took him aback was unleashing Chhatra League on the students. And thirdly were the orders to the police to open fire on the students. Pinak Ranjan feels it was then that the movement was hijacked. He is trying to discern who are the forces behind it, who stands to gain.
Smruti Pattanaik, researcher and Bangladesh expert of the Institute for Defence Studies and Analysis (IDSA) shares similar views with Pinak Ranjan. It is beyond her comprehension how a leader like Sheikh Hasina who has herself been involved in such movements and has been prime minister for over 15 years, failed to read reality. Smruti said, “The social media was rife with criticism against her, how could that escape her attention? Did she not understand that on 17 April the pulse of the movement had changed? What was the logic behind killing so many people? What was she thinking? This was not expected from such a tried and tested politician like her.”
Now that the events have take place, all three of them feel that the present situation is a significant challenge for Bangladesh. But none of them feel this is a failure on the part of Indian foreign policy. Deb Mukherjee said, “I will certainly not say that India made a blunder. Many may said that India put all its eggs in one basket. That is not true. I will say that in 2001 India reached out to BNP, but they did not reciprocate. On the contrary they created trouble in the northeast. India went close to Awami League and they drew close too. It was a convergence of interests.”
According to Pinak Ranjan, “It would be wrong to call this a failure. In politics, some things work and some things don’t. There was no one other than Awami League for India to cultivate for so long. Now India must interact with the new power. It’s a new challenge. India always works with whoever is in power. It will do so in this case too. There will be cooperation, whether more or less. It is the government’s rule to act according to situation.”
While mutual cooperation may seem a far cry at the moment, this may prove to be fruitful in the future, said Professor Sreeradha Datta, another close observer of Bangladesh. She told Prothom Alo, “It seems like there was been a permanent rip in the relations that have been in continuation for 15 long years. But reality is that a government must always work with a government. It must be understood that it does not matter whom we want, it matter whom the country wants. For a large part of these 15 years it was not understood who the people of Bangladesh wanted. India must face that reality now.”
Professor Sreeradha Datta said, “The elections in Bangladesh went well in 1991, 19996, 2001 and 2008. There next three were not elections. Actual democracy may return there. I believe this even more firmly after this movement.”
Her belief has been boosted by the ambitious student community of Bangladesh. Professor Sreeradha said, “It will be difficult to ignore the students now. I firmly believe that this student community will not give indulgence to fundamentalism. There may be some hesitation initially, they would not be averse to working with Indian in the future. After all, they were seeing up close the ambitious youth in India too.”
Sreeradha emphatically said, “The people of Bangladesh do not believe in religious fundamentalism. They never did. That is why Jamaat never gets more than 5 per cent of the vote. The only exception was in 1996, that to was only 8 per cent! In 2018, that fell to lower than one per cent.”
Former high commissioner Riva Ganguly was worried about the disruption of law and order. She said that this was the main matter of concern. “The students are appealing to end this. Many others are also calling for an end to this looting, chaos, free for all, and anarchy. But it is not stopping. The country belongs to everyone. Everyone should understand that the country belongs to all. Everyone should understand that the country is being harmed.”
Riva Ganguly said, it cannot be denied that the people of all walks of life in India and Bangladesh need each other. The people of the two countries must ensure that these doors are kept open. The first step is to form an interim government. The name of Nobel laureate Dr Muhammad Yunus and appeared as head of the interim government. He too has consented, it is reported.
Professor Sreeradha feels, “In this situation, it will not be bad if he (Dr Muhammad Yunus) agrees and if everyone consents. He is experienced. He understands the country. But it is not tested how astute he is in a political sense.”
Riva Ganguly said, “The students believe in Dr Yunus. But the first task is to restore law and order.” Deb Mukherjee said, “This will be positive. Yunus understands India. Of course, the first task will be to weather the initial storm.”
Pinal Ranjan and Smruti, however, have their reservations about Dr Muhammad Yunus. Pinak Ranjan said, “Yunus had floated a political party during 1/11. Later for various reasons he withdrew it and withdrew himself too. That is why I was rather surprised at his accepting this offer. But it is true that America will be pleased if Yunus heads the interim government.”
Smruti asked, “Will the students get whatever they ask for? Are their wants and wishes, their likes and dislikes the last word? Let’s see if everyone accept Dr Yunus. But whoever comes, India had one wish and that is that the country becomes stable. The rest comes later.”
* This report appeared in the print and online edition of Prothom Alo and has been rewritten for the English edition by Ayesha Kabir