By Arun Srivastava
After the sudden, inglorious exit of Sheikh Hasina from the political theatre of Bangladesh, the tone and temper of the students’ movement have changed. A new narrative is making rounds in the political and media circles that the student movement for quota reform is fading from the official narrative and BNP-Jamaat have conspired to take over the functions of the Government. It is also in the air that CIA and ISI, with the help of the Bangladeshi rightist forces, inimical to India, have backed the fundamentalist elements to turn the focus of the movement of the students in the direction of Hasina’s removal.
As it often happens with the autocrats, initially, Hasina did not take students’ anti-quota agitation seriously and believed the words of her sycophants. Just a day ahead when she fled Bangladesh, her minister for information and broadcasting, Mohammad Ali Arafat, ridiculed the agitation saying it was not a “mass upsurge”. He alleged that the students were being misled by the BNP and the Jamaat-e-Islami.
Within 24 hours of Hasina fleeing Bangladesh, two major developments took place: first, leaders of Anti-Discrimination Student Movement, which led the agitation, decided at a meeting held on Tuesday to position Nobel Peace Prize winner and founder of the Grameen Bank, Muhammad Yunus as the head the interim government. They had already discussed this issue with the Bangladeshi President Shahabuddin and the three service chiefs. Second, was the reluctance of UK Labour government to grant asylum to Hasina, even though she was sure of getting asylum. But it appears that Labour government is not willing to antagonise the USA. Playing safe, it has called for a UN-led investigation into the events of the past few weeks in Bangladesh. As regards US, the Biden-Harris administration has already cancelled her visa.
Bangladesh incident has certainly footprints of textbook CIA operations. It has been known for extending support to “spontaneous peoples’ upsurge”. No doubt Hasina turned autocrat in the last phase of her rule, but it is also a fact that she allowed the democratic institutions to function for long. The minorities were safe under her rule. The Bangladesh development poses one simple question: What does the US gain out of displacing Hasina? This would not only put Bangladesh on a shaky plane; it would also create problems for India. After this operation, the ISI will use Bangladesh as its operational base in Southeast Asia. It cannot be denied that post-Hasina Bangladesh can emerge as a security risk for India.
What is interesting is Hasina and students shared the common perception about the quota: both were opposed to its increase. After a similar student agitation in 2018, Hasina being disgusted with the bickering about freedom fighters’ share had scrapped the quota system. But in June this year, the High Court reinstated it and dismissed the government order of 2018. Though the Supreme Court slashed the quota for freedom fighter descendants to 5 per cent, the damage has already been done. Her detractors instigated the students to hit the streets. The brutal tackling of the student agitators by the state police, along with the derogatory statements made by senior Awami League ministers, enraged the agitating students and common people alike. The movement against quota metamorphosed into a massive upsurge against Sheikh Hasina personally. The right-wing BNP and Jamaat took full advantage of this.
Hasina blamed Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) and the banned Islamist outfit the Jamaat-e-Islami for turning the initially peaceful students’ protests into absolute violence and mayhem. The opposition were out of power for long and virtually stood marginalised. But the agitation resurrected them. They have come back to political centre-stage. Hasina firmly held that students were not involved in the violence and instead blamed the Islamic party, Jamaat-e-Islami, and BNP for the violence. It was after the second round of violence that a frustrated Hasina said: “Those who are carrying out violence are not students but terrorists who are out to destabilise the nation”.
It is interesting that China has not come out with any proper statement on the developments as has been done by the US. China has got its links with many political parties in Bangladesh, including the Awami League. Hasina as prime minister visited Beijing for three days last month. She has been managing a good balancing of respective bilateral relationships with both China and India. In Beijing, China announced that relations with Bangladesh would be upgraded to a comprehensive strategic partnership. Further, “The two sides should carry forward the fine tradition of mutual support and deepen political mutual trust. China supports Bangladesh in adhering to an independent foreign policy, following a development path that suits its national conditions and opposing any external interference.”
But Hasina was not particularly happy with the talks in China as her government had asked for a financial aid package of USD one billion, while China offered only USD 5 million. Hasina cut short the visit by one day and returned to Dhaka since the students movement was on. Hasina had some talks earlier with the Chinese government about a massive redevelopment plan for Teesta river, but before the China visit, Hasina visited Delhi and agreed to collaborate with India on the massive Teesta programme, instead of doing the same with China. This irked Beijing.
As regards the United States, the US has been opposed to Hasina for long. Its opposition has two dimensions: first, Bangladesh’s gradual drift towards China and Russia; and second, the US constantly complaining that Hasina has throttled democracy and is not allowing other parties to work. Incidentally, the US ambassador in Dhaka has been constantly interacting with the opposition leaders, without caring for protocol. Bangladesh has been subjected to a number of sanctions by the US. Despite the US warning, Bangladesh continued to trade with the Russian government after Ukraine war.
What angered US was Hasina’s stand on Taiwan. She said: “Bangladesh firmly adheres to the one-China principle, supports China’s position on the Taiwan issue, and resolutely opposes external forces interfering in China’s internal affairs”. Incidentally, Bangladesh was the first South Asian nation to sign on the Belt and Road Initiative. Since 2016, China has provided funds for building of roads, bridges and power projects. According to the Chinese ambassador, Yao Wen, Bangladesh had received US$1.4 billion of Chinese investment by the end of 2023.
The interim Bangladesh government head Dr. Mohammad Yunus is very close to the US administration. For the US agencies, Dhaka is an open field now for influencing developments in their favour. China is the second country which will be pro-active through its contacts among the new ruling elite. Only Russia and India will have to wait cautiously as both the countries’ ruling establishments are known to be pro-Awami League. India has a big stake while Russia doesn’t. It will be of interest to see whether the US and Chinese interests converge in the present Bangladesh to keep out India, or whether US and China fight among themselves with their differing approaches to take advantage from the current political turmoil. Following the latest developments in Bangladesh, geopolitical challenges in South Asia have got wider dimension. (IPA Service)
Follow our WhatsApp channel
