A bombshell article published in the Washington Post on 15 August claims that India pressed the United States to tone down its criticism of Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina and to scuttle any fresh sanctions against her neighbouring Bangladesh. The article jointly by Gerry Shih, Ellen Nakashima and John Hudson says that both countries must fall back, whether they mishandled Bangladesh.
By Saleem Samad
The story goes a year before her government was toppled in the first week of August in a student uprising, Indian officials began to lobby their U.S. counterparts to stop pressuring Hasina, who ruled Bangladesh for 15 years with an iron fist. American diplomats had publicly warned the 76-year-old Hasina for jailing thousands of her rivals, critics, dissidents and journalists ahead of a parliamentary election held last January.
Earlier, the Biden administration had sanctioned Bangladesh’s elite anti-crime police unit Rapid Action Battalion (RAB) accused of committing enforced disappearances and extra-judicial killings of suspects and had threatened to impose visa restrictions on those who undermined democracy or committed human rights abuses.
In a series of parleys, Indian officials demanded that the United States tone down its pro-democracy rhetoric. If the opposition were allowed to gain power in a free, fair and inclusive election, Indian officials argued, Bangladesh would become a breeding ground for Islamist militancy posing a security threat to India.
In several engagements, Indian Minister of External Affairs Subrahmanyam Jaishankar and Defence Minister Rajnath Singh met with Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Defence Secretary Lloyd Austin in November in New Delhi. While Indian national security adviser Ajit Doval also played a key role in presenting the Indian case during a visit to Washington that autumn.
These diplomatic engagements stirred a magical potion in the cooking pot. Soon after some “White House officials considered the downside of antagonising India, which made a series of appeals to the U.S. that it moderate its pressure on Hasina,” writes the prestigious newspaper publishing for 147 years. “You approach it at the level of democracy, but for us, the issues are much more serious and existential,” said an Indian government adviser on the condition of anonymity.
The American foreign policy bigwigs concluded that after the private parleys between top officials of the United States and India, “This is a core concern for us, and you can’t take us as a strategic partner unless we have some kind of strategic consensus.”
Finally, when Biden visited New Delhi in September 2023, he took a selfie with Sheikh Hasina and her smart daughter Saima Wazed, several analysts got a message of thaw between Dhaka and Washington.
Well, the Biden administration substantially softened its criticism and shelved threats of further sanctions against Hasina’s autocratic regime after the flawed January election, disappointing several civil societies in Bangladesh.
Now, after protesters defied the army’s curfew orders and marched on Hasina’s official residence, compelling her to flee to India, policymakers in both New Delhi and Washington went backstage to preview whether they mishandled Bangladesh.
The policymakers in the State Department believe that the ground reality often fails the balancing act in Bangladesh, as there are many places where the situation on the ground is complicated and you want to work with the partners you have in a way that is not inconsistent with what the American people expect.
The United States was in a dilemma regarding diplomatic engagement with Bangladesh vis-à-vis keeping India in good humour. Biden administration viewed India as a crucial partner in countering China.
Its smaller neighbours in South Asia increasingly view India itself as a meddling, aggressively nationalist power under Prime Minister Narendra Modi. India’s meddling in Maldives, Nepal and Sri Lanka backfired. The episode and kept a safe distance to avoid further embarrassment.
Several sources in Washington told the writers of the article that in the months leading up to the January election, divisions emerged within the U.S. government over how to handle Bangladesh.
Many former senior diplomats, who were assigned in Dhaka, and the State Department recommended a tougher stance against Hasina, particularly since President Joe Biden had campaigned on restoring democracy in Bangladesh.
Other U.S. officials felt there was little to be gained from further alienating Hasina and risking the safety of U.S. diplomats, including Ambassador Peter Haas, who had received threats from Hasina’s political henchmen.
The Post journalists wrote that for India, the dramatic developments in Bangladesh have turned a spotlight on its decade-long, all-in bet on Hasina, even as she grew autocratic and unpopular.
In January, after Hasina claimed victory in a flawed election, keeping thousands of opposition leaders in jail or hiding, Indian officials did not hesitate to the election results, fuelling calls from the opposition and like-minded groups for a boycott of Indian imports.
Jon Danilowicz, a retired U.S. diplomat who served as deputy chief of mission in Dhaka said, “New Delhi and Washington have to show some humility and acknowledge they got Bangladesh wrong by not siding with the Bangladeshi people and their democratic aspirations.”
After the elections, which were neither free nor fair, some criticised the U.S. for not imposing more restrictions on Bangladeshis, falsely attributing this to Indian influence, remarked Danilowicz.
The anti-quota movement spearheaded by the students of Dhaka University spread to all state universities and scores of private universities, and the “helmet behind” [vigilante recruits from Awami League’s students and youths] backed by riot police attacked the street protests.
The street protests turned violent and turned into anti-government uprisings which killed more than 600 people, according to the. Hasina made a hasty decision to flee the country and took refuge in India, at a Delhi military base.
After Hasina’s ouster, Indian officials have publicly changed tack and expressed willingness to work with the inventor of microcredit Dr Muhammad Yunus.
Last week, Modi sent his “best wishes” to Muhammad Yunus, the Nobel Prize-winning banker who took charge of Bangladesh’s interim government, even though he criticized India for backing Hasina. Yunus has called for new, free, and fair elections once the country’s stability is restored.
As India grapples with the shock of suddenly losing one of its closest allies, Indian foreign policy circles and media have been awash with speculation that Washington orchestrated the removal of Hasina, who has long had a chilly relationship with the United States. U.S. officials have staunchly denied the claim.
First published in the Northeast News, Guwahati, India on 18 August 2024
Saleem Samad is an award-winning independent journalist based in Bangladesh. A media rights defender with the Reporters Without Borders (@RSF_inter). Recipient of Ashoka Fellowship and Hellman-Hammett Award. He could be reached at saleemsamad@hotmail.com; Twitter (X): @saleemsamad