The events of Bangladesh and Sri Lanka have now shown that people have become dominant and decisive in the politics of South Asia
The Prime Minister of Bangladesh Sheikh Hasina was forced to resign after her 15-year long rule and leave the country under the pressure of the people’s movement. The situation took a turn for the worse within a few hours after the army decided not to fire on the protestors. She was India’s most reliable friend in South Asia. In the G-20 summit organized in Delhi, India gave special honor by inviting only Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina from South Asia. In the past three years, India’s ‘neighborhood first policy’ has suffered a major blow after the presidents of Afghanistan and Sri Lanka and the recent Prime Minister of Bangladesh, Hasina, were forced to leave the country. All South Asian countries except Bhutan are unstable. How responsible is the role of the ruler himself, regional power India and other external powers in this, now is the time for a serious analysis.
Before Afghanistan, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh, even the king of Nepal was forced to leave power under the pressure of the people’s movement. Pakistan’s elected Prime Minister Imran Khan accused the US of a conspiracy to overthrow him. Mohammad Moiju was elected as the President in Maldives with the ‘India Out’ campaign as the main slogan.
Hasina succeeded in transforming Bangladesh from a poor country to a middle-income country by providing political stability to Bangladesh. She also paid attention to the protection of Hindus and minority people. Despite that, his reign came to a tragic end. Hasina was forced to leave the country after the student movement, which started against the 30 percent reservation for the children of freedom fighters in government service, turned into an anti-government movement. As in Sri Lanka, the situation suddenly took a serious turn after getting information that millions of protestors would come to surround his palace. It is also suspected that Muslim extremists infiltrated the movement and that power became decisive in the end.
The last general election and external interest: Despite the boycott of the main opposition Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) in the general election held in January 2080, the voting was conducted amid strikes and violence. The opposition parties demanded that a neutral interim government should be formed and elections should be held. She ignored it with a smile. The United States and the European Union also questioned the validity of the election saying that the election boycotted by the opposition party was not free, transparent and credible. However, with the help and support of India, caste parties and some independent candidates were forced to participate in the elections and the elections were given legitimacy.
The Chief Election Commissioner himself initially commented that only 28 percent of voters participated in the polling, but later he corrected it to 40 percent. Hasina’s Abami League won 236 out of 298 seats in the one-party election. India welcomed the election results and congratulated Hasina. India’s main interest was to form an India-friendly government in Dhaka. Bangladesh minister Obaidul Kader admitted that ‘elections became possible after India supported the election process’. In this way, Hasina became the Prime Minister for the fifth time by winning the election which was considered illegal by the rest of the internal political forces.
India’s geopolitical and strategic interests are deeply intertwined in Bangladesh. India’s interests are linked to Bangladesh due to chicken neck, connectivity with North Eastern states, trade, reduction of China’s presence, management of Rohingya refugees, security of Hindus and minorities, control over Muslim militants, strategic importance of Bay of Bengal etc. China also has an effective presence in Bangladesh. Because of China, America’s strategic interest is concentrated. Hasina kept India and China in a strategic balance. After his departure from power, India has lost an important strategic partner in South Asia. Sheikh Hasina’s government was accused of authoritarianism and mafia. The accusation of supporting the mafia and some big corporate houses is not only in Bangladesh, but also on the government of India and Nepal. This is not a good sign. India, a democratic country with a population of about 170 million (150 million Muslims), has a larger strategic interest behind supporting India-friendly rulers rather than stabilizing democracy in neighboring Bangladesh. Being a close friend, India is also helping Hasina in the process of leaving the country and seeking political asylum. However, Western powers including Britain have not moved to grant him political asylum.
Stable India, Unstable Neighbourhood: Ever since India became independent, it is time to seriously look into the secret and reason why all South Asian countries, except Bhutan, have been politically unstable and India has remained stable and strong. External interference in India’s election and government change game is mostly nil. There, the government changes based on periodic elections and internal balance of power in the parliament. The army is not interested in politics. However, the influence and intervention of the army and external powers, especially India, is strong in the system and government changes in other South Asian countries and in internal affairs. If India had not supported the last election in Bangladesh when the opposition party had boycotted it, surely a neutral interim government would have been formed there and a clean and universally acceptable election environment would have been created. However, it was not certain that the government that would come in that way would be India-friendly. Hasina’s power interests and India’s strategic interests were deeply intertwined. Hasina’s son Sajeev Wajed has predicted that Bangladesh will become like Pakistan. With the end of the Hasina era, it cannot be said now whether Bangladesh will plunge into political instability as before or will take the path of stability through elections.
Role of the Army: Now it is not possible to impose military rule in Bangladesh. The protestors have already warned that they will not accept military rule. They have requested World Peace Medalist Mohammad Younis to take over the interim government. The army is playing the role of coordinator in the formation of the interim government. There is a long history of direct involvement of the army in Bangladesh’s domestic politics. There are examples of military leadership and disgruntled military officers who have repeatedly attempted coups or failed coup attempts. This time, the army’s decision not to fire on the protestors became the final reason for Hasina’s sudden coup. In Nepal too, India had warned the leadership of the Nepalese army not to fire on the protestors during the 19-day mass movement. In Sri Lanka too, President Mahinda Rajapakse was forced to leave the country after the army did not use maximum force against the protesters. Now in the politics of South Asia, human resources have become dominant and decisive.
The Bangladesh Army has been contributing significantly to world peace. After returning from participating in United Nations peacekeeping, there is a big change in the understanding and behavior of the military officers towards democracy and human rights. Bangladesh Army Chief of Staff Waqar Uzzaman, who took over the leadership only about a month and a half ago (July 23), has attended staff college in the UK and participated in UN peacekeeping operations in various positions. It is natural for the army to refuse to shoot because even the previous government cannot condone the accusations of human rights violations against the military officers if they use maximum force against the protestors and cause death, injury or disappearance.
During the system change in Nepal, by introducing India as a third power, competing internal powers are confident and the army is politically inactive. After the people’s movement of 062/63, the establishment of the National Federal Mission Unmin and the rebel Maoists wrote separate letters. Between 2007 and now, the Bangladesh Army seems to be playing the role of a third force in the smooth transfer of power. However, some have also interpreted it as a soldier’s kook.
