Commodore Kazi Emdadul Haq (Retd) 

BSP, ndu, psc. Founding Member, BIMRAD.

Introduction

Following the fall of Bangladesh's "Iron Lady," Sheikh Hasina, on August 5, 2024, India has started facing new challenges in the Bay of Bengal (BoB) region. Despite grappling with its own internal affairs, such as human rights and issues in the Seven Sister states or Kashmir, many Indian strategists and media outlets have attributed these challenges to the instability of neighbouring countries. Ambitious initiatives such as Modi's "Act East", "Neighbourhood First", "SAGAR", and "Make in India" seem to be losing momentum, because India applies subterfuge and lies in their diplomatic approach towards its neighbours—an issue that India denies.

As a result of India's flawed diplomacy, the public in many neighbouring countries seems increasingly discontent with India, compelled to align more closely with either the United States or China. Despite this growing wrath, India and its media continue to place the blame on these neighbouring countries for exacerbating India's tensions. Both the Indian government and its media appear to be aligned in blaming Bangladesh, suggesting involvement with external actors in destabilizing Sheikh Hasina's government.

Moreso, the conflicting interests of the United States and China in the BoB region have further complicated the geopolitical landscape, turning it into a complex nexus. This paper will briefly highlight these issues and explore the dynamics at play.

Blaming India’s Neighbourhoods, Particularly Bangladesh

Let's analyze how India is placing liability on its neighbouring countries in the context of the fall of Sheikh Hasina.

It’s important to note that both the Indian government and the media are expressing similar sentiments towards Bangladesh and other neighbouring countries. Some media outlets have even suggested that India should intervene in Bangladesh's affairs. It is so sarcastic that the extent of Indian media's involvement dictates whether Chief Advisor of Interim Government, Dr Yunus should address the upcoming United Nations General Assembly (UNGA), the 79th session in New York, as a member of the caretaker government. India's shock over the potential fall of Hasina's government is visible, as they appear unable to contain their frustration.

The frustration is evident as India's trade relationship with Bangladesh has been substantial, with Bangladesh consistently ranking as one of India's top export destinations. In recent years, India has exported a wide range of goods to Bangladesh, including cotton, machinery, food products, and pharmaceuticals. The robust trade ties have made Bangladesh a key market for Indian products, contributing significantly to India's foreign exchange earnings.

On August 6, 2024, India's Foreign Minister expressed condolences for some individuals who were killed or harassed after Hasina fled to India. However, India has shown no concern for over 700 people who were killed or murdered by the past regime during the student movement. While India may not acknowledge these unlawful killings, the UN has recognized the issue and sent a team to Bangladesh on 15 August 2024 to discuss modalities for investigating human rights abuses and violations.

It may be noted that there were some violence and revenge killings following Hasina's fall on 5^th August 2024 due to the absence of law-and-order forces. However, the situation, particularly regarding the safety and security of minorities, has been largely brought under control within a few days and Dr Yunus assured PM Narendra Modi on August 16, 2024 of the safety and security of minorities. Despite this fact, PM Modi has raised concerns over safety and security of Hindus in Bangladesh with President Joe Biden over the phone. We don’t know the details of his conversion; however, if we look back at history, the same Modi was sanctioned by the United States when he was the Chief Minister of Gujarat during the 2002 Gujarat riots, where more than 1,000 Muslims were killed and he failed to protect the victims. The human rights organization Amnesty International closed its operation in India. What a twist of fate that history often serves as a harsh reminder of the past.

Renowned journalist Mr. Shekhar Gupta has voiced concerns about India being surrounded by troubled neighbours, highlighting problems in every country around India. In one of his episodes, he discussed the challenges faced by all of India's neighbouring countries except Bhutan. He specifically pointed out the situation in Myanmar, where the military junta is known to have ties with China. Despite this fact, in 2020, India gifted Myanmar with a Kilo-class submarine from the Indian Navy, one of its most tactical weapons. It is believed that New Delhi made this move to counter China's influence in the region and to protect its interests, particularly since Bangladesh had recently acquired two submarines from China. It’s worth mentioning that when Bangladesh asked India for a submarine, India did not offer one. This decision frustrated many in Bangladesh, while India’s gesture towards Myanmar failed to gain favour with the junta. Yet India blames its neighbours.

India's most controversial role has been its support for Sheikh Hasina in advancing her authoritarian agenda. The last three consecutive general elections in Bangladesh have been widely criticized for not being free and fair, with allegations of voter suppression and manipulation. These elections were not recognized as legitimate by much of the Western world, with the United States openly stating that Bangladesh elections are neither free or fair; the UN also voiced concerns. However, India endorsed these elections as being free and fair. In return for this support, Hasina has granted India numerous strategic benefits, leading her to declare that "India will remember forever what we have done for them."

Yes, she is right. While India may never fully repay Bangladesh for what Hasina did for the country, it is undoubtedly showing its gratitude to Shaikh Hasina by providing her with shelter. Meanwhile, Hasina has been unable to secure a visa to go to any other country.

India has concentrated its efforts on backing Sheikh Hasina’s agenda rather than earning the goodwill of the Bangladeshi people. For example, Hasina approved a controversial deal for the Godda power plant with the Adani Group, which has been criticized for favouring Indian interests over Bangladeshi needs. She allowed the construction of a rail route through Bangladesh to facilitate the movement of goods to India's northeastern states, which many argue offers little or no benefit to Bangladesh. Hasina permitted India to erect a fence along the no-man’s land at the border, a move accompanied by numerous reports of indiscriminate killings by the Indian Border Security Force (BSF) in these areas. 

Dead body of Felani hanging on the fence in no-man’s land killed by BSF. Courtesy: bdnews24.com

India's support for Sheikh Hasina has often come at the expense of addressing the demands of the Bangladeshi people, such as the long-standing issue of sharing Teesta River water. India has been delaying an agreement on the equitable sharing of Teesta River water for more than a decade. This continued inaction on such crucial matters has further alienated the Bangladeshi population and highlighted the disconnect between India’s diplomatic priorities and the needs and concerns of Bangladesh's citizens.

India has similarly used diplomatic maneuvers with other neighbouring countries. In 2015, India imposed an unofficial blockade on Nepal, severely affecting the country's supply of essential goods and creating widespread hardship. In the Maldives, New Delhi has been accused of interfering in domestic politics, especially during periods of political crisis. Additionally, from 1983 to 1987, India involved itself in Sri Lanka's internal affairs, with the Indian intelligence agency Research and Analysis Wing (RAW) reportedly training Tamil militant groups during the Sri Lankan Civil War.

These are just a few examples of how India has used its 'big brother' attitude to exert influence over its neighbours, leading to the alienation of the general population in these countries. Despite this, India refuses to acknowledge the shortcomings in its diplomatic approach towards Bangladesh and other neighbouring nations.

With the exception of Bhutan, India views all its neighbouring countries as hostile. Whenever issues arise in these countries, Indian media and some strategists frequently attribute them to either the United States or Chinese involvement, at times Pakistan connection. It's as if India sees dragons lurking at every border, absolving itself of any responsibility for regional tensions.

India’s Present Challenges in the Region

Modi introduced several political slogans to appeal to his supporters, most notably the "Act East" and "Neighbourhood First" policies. The main objectives of Act East policy are to engage Asia-Pacific in the field of economic development, cultural exchange, and strategic and security cooperation through people-to-people connectivity. The converted Act East policy by Modi in 2014 from an earlier version of the Look East Policy had no virtual progress despite many initiatives taken by India which have built-in drawbacks.

If India views both Bangladesh and Myanmar as unstable countries, this makes land connectivity to the East nearly impossible, leaving only sea routes as a viable option. How India's "Act East" policy will succeed under these circumstances remains unclear. India's overconfident diplomats and strategists have struggled to establish strong connections with its immediate eastern neighbours, raising doubts about its ability to connect with the broader East Asian region.

It is an established fact that Myanmar is aligned with China. In the Maldives, President Mohamed Muizzu came to power with a campaign slogan of "India out." In Nepal, China is gaining more influence than India. Now, according to India, Bangladesh is also moving away from its traditional alliance with India. India's contradictory actions—labelling Bangladeshis as "termites" while promoting a "Neighbourhood First" policy—do not seem to align. Given this reality, it is unclear how India plans to implement its "Neighbourhood First" and "Act East" policies effectively.

India's "Make in India" policy, launched in 2014, aimed to transform India into a global manufacturing hub by encouraging both domestic and international companies to produce goods in India. It sought to reduce dependency on imports, particularly from China, by promoting local manufacturing and self-reliance.  In fact, trade between India and China has increased over the years. Imports from China have continued to grow, especially in sectors like electronics, pharmaceuticals, and machinery, highlighting the ongoing dependence on Chinese goods. This indicates that while the "Make in India" policy aimed to reduce reliance on China, in practice, economic ties have strengthened, reflecting the complexities and interdependencies in the global supply chain. 

Courtesy: Export Gemius

The interim government of Bangladesh has pledged to conduct an independent judicial inquiry into all illegal activities, including the 2009 killing of 57 army officers in the BDR Headquarters, Dhaka and cases of torture at the “Ayna Ghar” (glass room) in DGFI headquarters. These investigations may cause discomfort for India, as many of the victims have openly accused India of being involved or of supporting the previous regime in executing these illegal activities in Bangladesh.

The above arguments postulate that if India finds it challenging to maintain logistical connections with its Seven Sister states, it might consider establishing some form of connectivity through Bangladesh. This is supported by some Indian media suggesting intervention in Bangladesh to create a zone for minority protection. India's lack of criticism towards Russia for its invasion of Ukraine, a comparatively poorer country, implies that a militarily powerful India could justify taking similar actions against its neighbours to achieve its strategic goals. The critical question remains: are the Bangladeshis prepared to defend their motherland in such a scenario?

Interests of Superpowers in the Bay of Bengal Region

The Indo-Pacific Strategy (IPS) has brought two superpowers, the United States and China, along with the regional power India, into a strategic convergence in the Bay of Bengal region. Alternatively, one could argue that India's 'big brother' attitude towards its neighbouring countries has pushed these countries to align themselves either with China or the United States. Unfortunately, India does not acknowledge that this shift is a result of its own self-centered diplomatic policies.

China has long sought access to the BoB as an alternative to the Malacca Strait to gain access into the Indian Ocean which is vital for China’s sea route connectivity. It has made significant progress in establishing a connection to the BoB through the China-Myanmar Economic Corridor (CMEC). Additionally, China has secured a lease on Sri Lanka's Hambantota port, further strengthening its strategic foothold in the region.

China initially sought to secure the construction of a deep-sea port in Bangladesh, but the project was ultimately awarded to Japan, leaving China dissatisfied. Additionally, while China was the first to propose the Teesta River project, Sheikh Hasina suggested that the project should be undertaken by India which also frustrated China. In the latter part of Hasina’s tenure, it became apparent that China was being given less priority than India, and that India held more influence over Hasina's government than China did.

During Hasina's regime, U.S.-Bangladesh relations were not particularly friendly. Sheikh Hasina herself made a bold claim, stating that the United States was behind her removal from power, a claim that the U.S. has denied. However, U.S. interests in the region are largely guided by the objectives of the IPS. Given its strategic focus on countering China in the South China Sea, the U.S. is likely to continue relying on India to counter China's influence in the Bay of Bengal region.

Although India tried to connect its hinterland states through the Kaladan Multi-Modal Transit Transport Project it hung in limbo for more than a decade; India's infrastructure projects like the India-Myanmar-Thailand Trilateral Highway have no significant progress. On the contrary Beijing to Bangkok train route is just few links away. In the last decade, China has had significant engagements with East Asian countries. 

Courtesy: ThePrint

India continues to focus more on rhetoric than actual implementation regarding regional connectivity projects. As a result, the broader BoB region, including Bangladesh, Myanmar, and Thailand, is likely to align more with China than India in terms of connectivity. Additionally, with its control over the Hambantota Port in Sri Lanka, China is poised to exert even greater influence over this region, extending its strategic reach to the Malacca Strait. How can India get fruitful results from the Act East policy where archrival China remain in the region to counter India in all respects? China seems to have subtly fulfilled the aims of Modi's Security and Growth for All in the Region (SAGAR) policy, albeit to its own advantage.

Indian Perceived Foreign Policy

India's foreign policies have often been criticized for their inconsistencies since its independence. Although India maintained a stance of nonalignment, critics point out that it frequently sided with the Soviet Union during the Cold War. After the Soviet Union collapsed, India continued to foster strong ties with Russia. Together with the United States, India invested over US$ 3 billion in Afghanistan, aiming to build goodwill with the Afghan people and counter Pakistan's influence in the region. However, the abrupt withdrawal of U.S. forces from Afghanistan in 2021 left many of India's projects either abandoned or in a state of uncertainty.

India aimed to develop Iran's Chabahar Port to secure a strategic foothold in the region, but this effort faced obstacles due to China's significant investments in the same port. Additionally, attempts by India's Adani Group to invest in Myanmar Port construction and efforts by the Indian government to counter Chinese influence there have not been successful.

After Russia's invasion of Ukraine, India continued to buy Russian oil at discounted rates, refining it and selling it to European Union countries. This approach has helped India keep its inflation under control, even as inflation has risen in many other parts of the world. However, India's actions have faced significant criticism from the United States and other Western nations. The White House has suggested that India could end up on the "wrong side of history" because of its decision. The long-term consequences of India's choice to purchase cheap Russian oil are still emerging, and it remains uncertain how this will impact India's position in the future.

Concluding Remarks

India's flawed diplomatic policies towards its neighbouring countries, especially in recent decades, have often failed to resonate with the general public, leading to a rise in anti-Indian sentiment. Many political parties in neighboring countries are likely to capitalize on growing anti-Indian sentiment, leading to the formation of governments that are increasingly unfriendly towards India. India would do well to recognize this sooner rather than later to avoid the worst.

The future of India-Bangladesh relations is likely to remain tense and could deteriorate further if independent inquiries reveal that agreements between the two countries have disproportionately favoured India at the expense of Bangladesh's interests. China is likely to gain greater investment opportunities in Bangladesh, enhancing its access to the Indian Ocean.  In the Bay of Bengal region connecting to the Indian Ocean, the United States may find itself with no choice but to rely on India to counter China's expanding influence, at least in the foreseeable future.

Last but not least, the aspirations of the people in the Bay of Bengal region remain unmet, as they continue to be used as pawns by corrupt politicians. Since independence, India has employed the deceitful tactics with its neighbours instead of genuinely trying to win the hearts and minds of the general populace. Unless India adopts a more people-centric diplomatic approach, Modi's strategic objectives may remain unfulfilled, and the allegiance of the people in the region, whether we like it or not, may increasingly tilt towards China.