Suddenly from early afternoon on August 5th the situation in Bangladesh turned grave. The anti-quota movement that started in June ended with Prime Minister Hasina’s hurried decision to leave the country on the 5th of August 2024. An all-pervading bleakness seems to have engulfed the country. The news of attacks on minorities and the iconoclastic mood of the triumphant masses bent on demolishing the statues of Bangabandhu, albeit very unfortunate, have unleashed loads of anxiety and alarm in India.
We do not know what actually provoked Hasina to make such a hasty decision to leave the country or whether there were some foreign hands that acted at a subterranean level to effectuate the regime change. The way the Army chief has started making lofty promises and yesterday’s statements of the President made it somewhat clear that there was no other option left to Hasina, at least given the political situation and mindset of the army that has been the most pivotal stakeholder in the system, hence appearing as a saviour of the country, taking credit and keeping the elected regime permanently weak even after the electoral mandate.
This crisis in Bangladesh is not an abrupt aberration or routine failure of its government, rather it serves as a critical lesson—an eye-opener for India, particularly in understanding the complex interplay of the evolution of students’ movement, political forces, socio-economic frustration and various social media based narratives that conjoined to attack order and ushered in instability in the hope of a new dream. The situation is not merely a humanitarian issue; apart from students, it involves a multitude of actors including the probability of external meddling such as China and internal factions like opposition parties, the military, and even a section of the masses. These elements converged to throw a gauntlet to Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina’s regime, thereby setting the stage for a potential scenario of ‘regime change’ underpinned by the cloak of ‘mass rebellion’. India must recognize that this is not just an isolated event but part of a broader regional dynamic that could have far-reaching implications.
Moreover, the emerging discontent among Bangladesh’s youth signals a significant shift in political sentiment. The younger generation’s growing disenchantment with established leadership figures, including their historical icon Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, indicates a profound disconnect between the ruling elite and the populace. While we are still nostalgic about Bangabandhu’s pioneering role in Bangladesh’s liberation in 1971, it is really painful to reconcile that the present generation in Bangladesh is inclined to disown him. This generational rift could exacerbate tensions and lead to further destabilization. The recent violent protests and attacks on government properties including Prime Minister’s House evoke memories of similar upheavals in Afghanistan and Sri Lanka, highlighting the potential for chaos that could spill over into neighbouring countries.
India must tread carefully in its response to these developments. The spectre of regional instability might invite opportunistic actors—both regional powers and extra-regional entities—to exploit the situation for their own narrow gain. A failure to address these dynamics could result in a security vacuum that threatens not only Bangladesh but also India’s own interests in the immediate neighbourhood. Therefore, while wise decisions are called for without poking a nose into the domestic affairs of Bangladesh, India cannot afford to ignore the need for strategic foresight and caution in navigating this precarious landscape.
In conclusion, India should adopt a nuanced approach that balances pro-democracy concerns with geopolitical realities. Engaging diplomatically with Bangladesh while remaining vigilant about external influences will be crucial in preventing further deterioration of stability in the region. As events unfold in a slow manner, India must remain alert to the shifting political currents within Bangladesh and prepare for potential repercussions that may arise from this volatile situation. Hence it is not unreasonable that India’s MEA has already in its Twitter has cautioned against visiting Bangladesh at this critical juncture although we hope people-to-people contact should continue to pave the way for greater bonhomie.
India should also keep in mind that the arrival of Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina to India has ignited a wave of controversy across social media platforms, reflecting the complex and often fraught relationship between Bangladesh and its larger neighbour. In contemporary Bangladesh, there exists a predominant sentiment that views India as “the other,” characterised by suspicion, emotional responses, and deep-seated prejudices. This perception is not merely a reflection of historical grievances but is also influenced by current geopolitical dynamics. As Bangladesh navigates its identity in the South Asian region, any overtures from India are often met with scepticism, leading to a narrative that frames Indian engagement as potentially intrusive or hegemonic.
On the flip side, India’s proactive stance right now towards advising or assisting Bangladesh could be portrayed or interpreted wrongly and there is every chance that the outcome of such steps might result in exacerbating regional tensions, particularly with Pakistan and China. The strategic landscape of South Asia is turning increasingly delicate; the superficial calm is more illusive than real. We conjecture that increased Indian involvement at this moment may be perceived as a threat by the beleaguered forces prompting them to deepen their influence in Bangladesh. This scenario raises concerns about the stability of governance within Bangladesh itself. The country cannot afford to operate under an ad hoc government structure that lacks nationwide legitimacy. Therefore, India’s approach must be one of caution and prudence, avoiding any risky expedients that could destabilize the region further.
Leave a Reply