Who should be blamed for meddling in Bangladesh?
The election sans opposition parties in the battle of the ballots. The principal opposition Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) boycotted the election along with other smaller opposition after 10,000 leaders and members were jailed
By Saleem Samad
Despite reservations of several Awami League leaders and ministers, India has seen its “favoured person” and her party return to power for the fifth time in the recent national elections to Jatiya Sangsad (parliament) in Bangladesh.
Incumbent Bangladesh Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina returned to power in the national elections on 7 January 2024 for a fifth consecutive term. Thus the longest-serving women prime minister in the world will be inserted in the Guinness Book of World Records.
The election sans opposition parties in the battle of the ballots. The principal opposition Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) boycotted the election along with other smaller opposition after 10,000 leaders and members were jailed with charges of terrorism and vandalism of state properties slammed against them.
On the other hand, the United States had wished to see the authorities hold free, fair and inclusive elections and reiterated they do not favour any political party in the country.
Well, China and Russia have reacted to the elections in Bangladesh positively, having earlier officially blamed the Americans for meddling in the “internal affairs” of a country of 170 million people. Russia came up with the fiction that the United States had plans to ignite a so-called “Arab Spring” movement in Bangladesh after the elections on 7 January.
“There are serious reasons to fear that in the coming weeks an even wider arsenal of pressure, including sanctions, may be used against the government of Bangladesh, which is undesirable for the West,” Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said on 15 December. “Key industries may come under attack, as well as several officials who will be accused without evidence of obstructing the democratic will of citizens,” she said.
This was the second official statement about Bangladesh from the Kremlin. Earlier, Moscow had criticised the unwarranted hyperactive role of US Ambassador Peter Haas and his interference in Bangladesh’s internal affairs.
“At the end of October, he met with a member of the local opposition to discuss plans for organising anti-government rallies,” alleged Zakharova during a briefing on 22 November. “Such actions amount to nothing less than gross interference in internal affairs,” Kremlin rebukes Washington. Which the Russian foreign policy makers deem “gross interference in [the] internal affairs” of Bangladesh.
Russia accused the US and its allies [without naming any countries] of influencing the internal political process of Bangladesh under the guise of ensuring that elections in Bangladesh are transparent and inclusive.
he United States has built a narrative around ‘free and fair’ elections in Bangladesh. Under this pretext, it announced a visa policy in May. Washington reiterated that it does not favour any particular political party in Bangladesh but the ground reality is vastly different. The US announcement of its controversial visa restrictions for Bangladeshis involved disrupting the poll environment.
Meanwhile, in the same month, US Deputy Assistant Secretary Afreen Akhter came to Dhaka and said that her country was “not interfering or weighing in with any particular party or candidate” though “we are working to support the electoral environment here”.
Haas’ activities have drawn flak but have been welcomed by the BNP and hardliner ally the Islamist party Jamaat-e-Islami, who hailed him as a “true friend of Bangladesh”. The US ambassador’s activities did not ebb even after India sent the US a clear message last month about Bangladesh’s election and Delhi’s stance that the people of Bangladesh will decide their future.
The US has a long history of interfering in Bangladesh’s internal affairs. Before the 10th parliament election in 2014, erstwhile Ambassador Dan Mozena had made similar attempts to Haas but could not prevent the rigged election.
One of the key players behind the 2006–2007 changeover was US Ambassador Patricia Butenis. At that time, the US enlisted some of the country’s civil society members as collaborators in establishing a military-backed caretaker government, halting the democratic process.
Russia had said that the US and its allies are influencing the internal political process of Bangladesh under the guise of ensuring that elections in Bangladesh are transparent and inclusive. But all the hopes were dashed when India and the US held their fifth 2+2 meeting on 10 November in New Delhi. Speculation was rife when Bangladesh and its election were among the issues discussed at the dialogue in New Delhi between the two countries.
Indian Foreign Secretary Vinay Kwatra said they discussed the situation in Bangladesh in detail. He said the nature of development and elections in Bangladesh are internal matters. India has always supported Bangladesh’s vision to make it stable, peaceful, and progressive, and that support will continue.
Kwatra also said “We have clarified our position on Bangladesh. India never bothers about any third country.”
What transpired from the discussion was that India had made it clear that elections or development were purely Bangladesh’s internal affairs and that the people of Bangladesh would decide their future. India has also clarified that the current US policy will increase China’s dominance in the Indo-Pacific region.
On the other hand, the US State Department issued a press release after the meeting with India. It contained detailed references to the international issues discussed with India. But there was no reference to the election in Bangladesh.
According to a leading Bangla-language newspaper Anandabazar Patrika from Kolkata, the ruling Awami League was happy with the way Delhi has stood by Dhaka.
At home, the opposition BNP and other anti-government parties were disappointed. According to one report, a senior BNP leader visited Delhi to convey a message from his party to Indian diplomats before this meeting.
The BNP leader told officials in Delhi that “by standing with the illegal government, they would further alienate themselves from the people of Bangladesh”.
Analysts say that the US had been hyperactive over Bangladesh’s elections, going as far as publicly announcing the visa restrictions. There is a fear, that Islamic forces may rise again in Bangladesh and disrupt the political balance of South Asia.
Last September, Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina visited Delhi to attend the G-20 Summit. Hasina participated in a bilateral meeting with Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and also had a private parley at his official residence in Delhi.
Modi himself posted on social media that there was a very ‘fruitful discussion’ at that meeting. Besides, he assured Hasina that India’s strong support for Bangladesh will continue in the future.
In the last three terms (2009-2013, 2013-2018, and 2018-2023) India has supported the Awami League government led by Hasina in the international arena.
Indian media at various times has indicated that India and the United States share the same opinion on the issue of democratic rights in Bangladesh, which confused the political circles.
Leading development economist and researcher Dr Hossain Zillur Rahman in a tweet (X) on the victory day celebration on 16 December wrote: Dark and darker clouds hover. Bitter ground realities are a far cry from Bangladesh’s foundational aspiration for justice in all spheres. Still, Victory Day reminds us of the dream and the need to continue striving.
Alexander Mantytskiy, Russian envoy to Bangladesh at a press conference remarked that Russia is not in competition with the US or the West to spread its influence in Bangladesh.
In a reaction to political events in Bangladesh, an engineer from Pakistan R M Hassam Sajjad says, “The same is happening in Pakistan. The popular party [Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf – PTI] has been denied its right to participate in the upcoming elections and has been on target since the exit of IK [Imran Khan] from govt. The only difference is that we have military dictators while India and Bangladesh have civil dictators.
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
Views are personal and International Affairs Review neither endorses nor are responsible for the same.
We welcome all pitches and submissions to IAR via email: iareview2019@gmail.com
