Interview
There were few voters, the competition was among themselves
Professor Sreeradha Datta of India's Jindal Global University and Professor Amena Mohsin of Dhaka University's department of international relations, in an interview with Prothom Alo's AKM Zakaria and Sheikh Sabiha Alam, talk about Bangladesh's 12th parliamentary election, Bangladesh's relations with India and the countries of the West in context of the election, a balance in relations, risks and prospects.
India wanted to see a peaceful election in Bangladesh. It wants to see stability in Bangladesh. Has Bangladesh's election fulfilled India's wishes?
Sreeradha Datta: India feels that the manner in which Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina is running the country, relations between the two countries will grow even stronger. She has brought stability. The country has been more or less in this condition for the last 15 years. With the expectations for a couple of random incidents, the election was more or less peaceful. India feels it is best for India if there is peace and stability in Bangladesh. That is possible on the part of Sheikh Hasina. She has proven that. So Sheikh Hasina's government is good for India. As long as she is in power, she will look after India's interests. I cannot speak on India's official position. I am just referring to the statements made by India before the election. India wanted a free, fair and peaceful election in Bangladesh.
Truth be told, relations were the same with India when there was a military rule in Bangladesh too. But there was some dilemma on India's side because of the system of government. We have emerged from that.
India is the largest democracy in the world. What is India's stance concerning democracy?
Sreeradha Datta: You see, China's system does not match with India. But even so, India works with China. We have bilateral ties. The bottom line is, whoever looks after India's interest will be important to them. 'Democracy' is now not the main concern of India when it comes to relations.
Internal security is extremely important to India. Sheikh Hasina has looked after our security. India has got strong support in that area. In that sense, India isn't looking into the matter of democracy. We political scientists, those involved in studies and academics, may have a different narrative. If you ask me my opinion, I feel Bangladesh's democracy has derailed, if it can be called democracy at all.
Two years ago I had written that Bangladesh's democracy was fragile. That has deteriorated further. All that takes place under an authoritarian government is taking place here. That has been going for at least the last two or three years.
How credible has the election been? Where has this election taken Bangladesh as a democratic country?
Sreeradha Datta: The government says that the voter turnout was 40 per cent, international sources and the journalists say 27 per cent. But many of my acquaintances of the Awami League camp say 20 per cent. The roads were empty on the day of the election. It was like a hartal, though there is debate about this. Many say that there are more votes cast in the cities than in the villages. Very few of my acquaintances actually voted. Over 10 per cent for sure didn't vote.
Amena Mohsin: For those who are with Awami League, this election was credible. They say that the voter turnout was 41.8 per cent, but we saw a lower voter turnout. Elections are competitive. Here the competition was among themselves. The results of the vote were predictable. Had other parties taken part, then the defeated party may not have found the election acceptable. Then the narrative of the general people does not matter. Before looking into whether the election was credible to other countries around the world, it is essential to first reach an understanding among ourselves. The nomination process itself is enough to reveal the picture.
The news media monitored this process closely. The independent candidates who contested against Awami league were of the same party. Previously it has seemed we were progressing towards democracy. Despite challenges, we have been progressing. But afteR the 2014 election, it no longer seemed that way. The people's areas of hope have been destroyed.
Whether India admits it or not, they had all sorts of initiatives and efforts concerning Bangladesh's election. In the past some of these activities had been visible too. Many among the opposition feel that the government has come to power due to Indian support. What do you say?
Sreeradha Datta: Many of my friends, journalists, students and I myself, share this view. They give the example of 2014. In the past we have seen, even if there is a natural disaster in Bangladesh, they blame India.
I am not a part of the government. But it is only natural for India to be interested in the election of its neighbour. Also, Narendra Modi wants to establish a policy of friendship and cooperation in the region and that will require Bangladesh's support to materialise. In that sense, India was eager to see Sheikh Hasina's government in power. It has also had to keep an eye on Bangladesh so that it does not lean towards China.
The election this time was at the international community's centre of attention. The opposing stances of India and the US were clear. India tried to explain that if the US puts on pressure for a fair election, Bangladesh will lean towards China. How logical is this?
Sreeradha Datta: When it comes to South Asian issues, I feel that India and the US are on the same page. China's stance is different. India has made certain statements about China's involvement in various construction projects of Bangladesh. Some of the projects may not have been implemented. But when it comes to Bangladesh's election, India and China share the same stand.
Newspaper reports indicate that Bangladesh is on the brink of an economic crisis. Question has arisen as to how Bangladesh will manage this. Bangladesh has received a loan from the IMF. The US has influence on the IMF and the World Bank.
If we look at readymade garments, the main destination is the US. India may not have been able to play a role in the financial sector like China, but then there is the clear example of Sri Lanka. The Maldives and Nepal are heading in the same direction. Bangladesh will tread there with caution. When Sri Lanka fell into dire straits, it was India that rushed forward before everyone else. China took its time. Bangladesh may fall onto very hard times. China will take advantage of that. India has its doubts about China in that regard. But India has the capacity to stand by Bangladesh in hard times.
It is said that the US wants to curb dependence on India in this region. That is why the two countries have adopted different stands on the question of Bangladesh. From India's stand it seems that they find US' exertion of its influence in this region more threatening than China's influence. What do you say?
Sreeradha Datta: To me India has apprehensions concerning China rather than America. Of course, India does have reservations about the US role in Pakistan and Afghanistan. It is said that America has involvement in the rise of the Islamists there.
The US and UK have said that the elections in Bangladesh haven't been free and democratic. Do you foresee any further pressure from the West?
Sreerasha Datta: There will be a certain degree of pressure. We do not see them saying anything about Pakistan, so why about Bangladesh then? The Democrats and the Republicans share the same stance regarding the Bangladesh issue. I feel that the US will not stir up the readymade garment sector right now. There may be visa sanctions, if not now, after six months or so.
Amena Mohsin: There may be some pressure. There are so many dimensions to international politics. Just as China is important in the Indo-Pacific region, so is Russia. These issues are very complex. The question has arisen as to whether there will be any pressure from the US. The question is how much pressure will there actually be. The US said the wages of the ready-made garment workers should be increased, but are they ready to pay higher prices?
Workers are exploited in a capitalist society. The US is the exponent of this system and is profiting from this system. Many students from our country are going abroad for higher education. They will not risk this area in the name of democracy.
We have spoken about our system of nomination. How was Trump nominated in the election? He wasn't a republican. What is the role of the US in Palestine? There are questions about their ethics too.
How Bangladesh strikes a balance in its relations with India and China?
Amena Mohsin: We will need some more time to understand this matter of balance. It is to be seen how the government strikes this balance between China and India.
China was to carry out the Teesta project. If India does not allow that, it is hard to say what will happen then. The common people have a demand too. They will say if India is not signing the Teesta treaty, then why will we not have the Teesta project with China? India itself has trade with China.
Bangladesh' people feel that they cannot exercise democracy because of India. Many allege that Bangladesh gives more than it receives from India. What do you say?
Sreeradha Datta: The general people are benefitting from the ongoing projects between Bangladesh and India. People are benefitting from the trade and the energy sector, or from the gas supplied from Tripura. The communication sector has improved. Buses, trains are commuting. The common people are the beneficiaries.
There are two areas where consensus hasn't been reached. One is sharing of river waters, that is, the sharing of the waters of 54 rivers, and the other is the border problem. I do not understand why the Teesta deal is not being signed. The people of West Bengal opposed it at the time because the amount of water to be provided wasn't there in West Bengal. The commitment had been made based on very old data.
Bangladesh-India relations have progressed on the basis of the joint statement of the two countries in 2010. The statement had said that there would be basis-based river management. Work is on in Kushiara. The common people react more when it comes to water issues. Border killings have not been halted, but have lessened. The two governments have regular meetings and talks on this issue.
Then there is the trade imbalance. There is scope now for duty free entrance of readymade garments. Anything can go to India now except certain contraband items. People are enjoying the benefits of all the projects done with India.
Amena Mohsin: You mentioned cooperation in the power and energy sector, but public opinion says the contrary. There is anger over the hike in onion prices. There are allegations of things being handed over to India. It is important to take these perceptions of the people into consideration. As for communications, there used to be good communication among teachers, intellectuals, researchers at one time. We would take out joint publications, books and writings. Now cooperation may have increased in technology, trade, health, but people to people contact is no longer what it used to be.
India maintains that it backs the current government continuously because fundamentalism may rise in Bangladesh if this government is not in place. How logical is this?
Amena Mohsin: India has an apprehension about this. But then there is also the risk of increasing discontent from the view that people of Bangladesh are being deprived of their democratic rights for India.
I don’t agree with the Indian worry about the rise of fundamentalism here. Bangladesh is very successful in staving off terrorism. I worked with the youth of Bangladesh and I’m sure of this conviction.