Why do the Indian armed forces need to be prepared?

।। Kamal Ahmed ।।

Over the past decade, the most commonly enunciated phrase in our diplomatic talk was “India-Bangladesh friendship is at an all-time high”. But last week we heard the Indian defence minister Rajnath Singh calling upon their armed forces to remain prepared, referring to the Russian-Ukraine war and the Israel-Hamas conflict, along with the situation in Bangladesh. This was not any political speech of his, it was directives at the Joint Commanders’ Conference of the armed forces.

Our foreign affairs advisor Md Touhid Hossain said he was more surprised than alarmed at Rajnath Singh’s statement. He can use the term ‘surprised’ as a diplomatic reaction. So it was no surprise either when he said there was “no fear of any war between India and Bangladesh.” However, it is essential to clearly highlight that the Indian assessment regarding the political change in Bangladesh resulting from the struggle of the democracy-loving people, is wrong and dangerous.

There are two reasons why it is essential to point out this incorrect assessment. Firstly, the conflicts in Israel and Gaza are wars against foreign aggression and occupation. Bangladesh is not involved in any aggression, occupation or war. So the reference to Bangladesh is not at all relevant in the backdrop of India’s policy of not taking any stand in the Russian aggression against Ukraine or against Israel’s genocide to retain its occupation in Gaza.

Secondly, what has taken place in Bangladesh is entirely a matter of our domestic politics wherein an autocrat was toppled in a mass uprising. There is no visible role of any third country or quarter’s involvement here. On the contrary, the objective expressed in his directives to the armed forces to evaluate and take up a strategy in this regard, can be seen nothing short of an explicit effort of intervention by a foreign power.

Secondly, what has taken place in Bangladesh is entirely a matter of our domestic politics wherein an autocrat was toppled in a mass uprising. There is no visible role of any third country or quarter’s involvement here. On the contrary, the objective expressed in his directives to the armed forces to evaluate and take up a strategy in this regard, can be seen nothing short of an explicit effort of intervention by a foreign power.

The questions become even more significant on two grounds — firstly, India has lent its open support to the 15-year undemocratic and oppressive rule of toppled autocrat Sheikh Hasina; and secondly, India has given shelter to Sheikh Hasina after she fled the country in face of the mass uprising. On top of that, India has not made it clear as yet as to whether this shelter is temporary or a permanent political shelter.

In its efforts to highlight itself as an unrivalled superpower in South Asia, India has pitched this region into danger of nuclear weapons. Also, its efforts on a global scale to be on equal footing with China, has increased the complications in the geopolitics of the region. India’s relentless endeavour to create and consolidate a sphere of influence in the region, makes it increasingly difficult for its smaller neighbours to pursue independent and autonomous foreign policies. This narrow attitude of the big country towards its small neighbours is not limited to just choosing political allies, but it reflected in all areas of bilateral relations.

In this regard, questions may be raised about fairness and equality in the areas of sharing water of common rivers, development of shared natural resources, development assistance, tackling human crises like sheltering refugees and cooperation at a global level.

How online disinformation fuels religious, ethnic and sociopolitical tensions during Bangladesh’s regime change
The dismal state of India’s relations with its neighbours goes to show that prime minister Modi’s so-called ‘Neighbourhood First’ policy is nothing but political rhetoric. It may be relevant to quote from what Indian journalist Jayanta Roy Chowdhury wrote around three months ago in the Free Press Journal, “While relations with Pakistan are frozen in time and space with charges of terror export against Islamabad, Nepal has been veering towards the Chinese orbit and squabbling with India over a map which shows bits and pieces of Kumaon as part of the former Hindu kingdom. Bhutan, an Indian protectorate, has been striking off on its own in its anxious quest to not antagonise a rising China and is currently busy negotiating its border with Beijing” (Neighbourhood Diplomacy: Dhaka, India’s Only Best Friend? 23 June 2024).

Professor Mushtaq Khan of London University’s School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS), who has worked on reforms in Nepal, remarked that the common people of Nepal for a few generations will not forget the economic sanctions that India had imposed in 2016 in order to place political pressure on Nepal.

We know that though the Maldivian president Muizzu attended Modi’s swearing-in ceremony, he forced India to withdraw a few dozen of its soldiers that were stationed there. When Sri Lanka’s economy was on the brink of collapse, India may have assisted it with loans, but it is clear that in order to have its massive loans with China rescheduled, it certainly will not solely provide India with all facilities. Simply put, India had endeavoured to steadily increase and consolidate its influence in Bangladesh through Sheikh Hasina, the so-called Iron Lady of South Asia. The Delhi policymakers forget the tried and tested truth that the oppressed people are never the friends of those who forge friendship with an autocrat.
On 2018 when Sheikh Hasina had commented that India will forever remember what she had given it, there was a tone of dismay in her words, for not getting anything in return. But perhaps India did not understand the depth and extent of that dismay, or perhaps they felt that they would repay by providing the person Sheikh Hasina with shelter if such a situation arose.

”The two Bangladeshi young children who were recently shot dead by Indian border guards, Swarna Das and Jayanta Kumar Singh, were both adherents of the Hindu religion”

The list of what has been given to India is very long. The list of what has been received in return is not only extremely short, but lacks in fairness in many instances. It is now almost universally acknowledged that the three rigged and fraudulent elections held to extend the tenure in power, would not have been possible without India’s support and, in certain instances, direct intervention. The recompense was not for the country, but for the individual.

‘Connectivity’ is a buzz word in South Asia nowadays, and somewhat held in esteem too. Increasing road, railway and river connectivity, in other words, prioritising the revival of historic routes of communication, has in effect unilaterally benefitted India. Even the energy sector has been slipped into the connectivity network. As a result, instead of any competitive process, a power generation and purchase deal, with ridiculous conditions, has been signed with the Indian Adani Group, which has close ties with the Indian government. Even international experts have expressed their incredibility at how Bangladesh signed such a deal that went against its own interests.

Now the big burden of transactions in the energy sector has been added to the steadily mounting imbalanced trade with the large neighbour. By means of laying a pipeline to import fuel oil and the floating LNG project, energy dependence on India has been increased further. According to the Financial Times, just in electricity alone, one-fifth of Bangladesh’s demands depend on India. Nepal’s energy embargo experience indicates just how dangerous such dependence is to national security. Yet almost 40 per cent of Bangladesh’s power generation capacity remains unused.

The foreign affairs advisor sees no danger of conflict with India. But it is imperative to know how the information war and the killing of innocent people along the border will be resolved. The democratic aspirations of the 170 million Bangladeshis are insulted when the democratic movement that toppled the autocrat is dubbed as a conspiracy of Islamic fundamentalists and the US. The Indian mainstream media is keeping up a steady flow of disinformation and propaganda regarding minority rights in Bangladesh, fanning flames of communal hatred and unwarranted instigation. India may be creating a furor over security of the minority community after the political change in Bangladesh, but the two Bangladeshi young children who were recently shot dead by Indian border guards, Swarna Das and Jayanta Kumar Singh, were both adherents of the Hindu religion.

* Kamal Ahmed is a senior journalist